I don't understand why so many people on this forum seem to say "monotheistic religions are for the birds, now Buddism, those people are onto something"...

Buddhism is a "made up" religion. A dude went out one day, had a vision, changed his name and somehow this is something you guys say "yeah, I can get behind that".

I can understand if you wanna say God doesn't exist, or Jesus was just some dude, but the bible is a historical account from more than a dozen people over the course of hundreds of years. How is that somehow less credible than than Buddhism.

I think i've made it clear enough that I'm a christian on this board, but I have a great deal of respect for philosophy and logical thought. I think this unanimous respect for Buddism is kind of lazy.

to be really honest, I think most people on this board that are saying bad stuff about theists and lauding philosophical religions are just biased because they had Jesus fed to them when they were young and are rebeilling now.

I will say that the thought behind Buddhism is interesting, but when I put my faith in a religion, I actually believe in it because i think it's true, not because it's the Coolest idea, i think the bible is a credible account. I don't think some guy's day dream is a credible account.

Go ahead and tear me up,

thebishop

Try looking at what you just said. Are you going to tell me Christianity isn't a "made up" religion as you put it? Yet why are the prophecies and some stories in the "bible" found in pagan folklore, that existed 100's of years before christianity? You mean to say we should take the "bible" literally as statements of fact? The gospels were written long after the death of yoshua, in fact those who wrote the gospels, probably wouldn't recognize him if they bumped into him in the street. What if I decided to write my own bible(read historical account) based on what we know now. All I would have to do is include some personal opinions about ethics and call it the word of God. Would that make my book any more Bible than your precious king james VERSION? Also not to mention the "bible" has been edited numerous times. Some books were taken out, some of the translations aren't accurate. Not to mention the people who edited the "bible" had a lot of wealth and political power and had a lot to gain by having certain statements ommited or included. Why even now the church has enough money to end world hunger 2 times over? What do a bunch of clergymen who swore a life of poverty need with that much money?

I don't care if I offend you, but I'd rather believe a made up idea than a institution for sheep like christianity.

Christianity's bullshit. Islam's bullshit. Jeudaism is bullshit. Hinduism is bullshit. Seikhism is bullshit. Buddhism is bullshit too. I don't believe any of them fully, but that doesn't mean I can't follow their teachings. Most people seem to like the teachings of Buddhism, the buddhist outlook on life, and good for them. If we were all Buddhist or Hindu the world would be a better place.

how can you even say their teachings are that different?

isn't...

do unto others as you'd have others do unto you

bad karma begets bad karma, good karma begets good karma

the exact same as the laymen's "what goes around comes around."?

quote:Originally posted by IzzyReele:

how can you even say their teachings are that different?

isn't...

do unto others as you'd have others do unto you

bad karma begets bad karma, good karma begets good karma

the exact same as the laymen's "what goes around comes around."?

Ok, one teaching is the same. Well done.

First of all, I am Buddhist. And Bishop, I found your post incredibly offensive. Not only does you post show a lack of respect for Buddhism (or any other religion), but it shows a lack of knowledge about Buddhism.

quote:

Buddhism is a "made up" religion. A dude went out one day, had a vision, changed his name and somehow this is something you guys say "yeah, I can get behind that".

This same example can be used for Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Islam. The prophet of which ever religion had a revalation/vision/message from god, whatever. He may or may not have changed his name and then began telling others of his experience.

quote:

I can understand if you wanna say God doesn't exist

God's existence or lack thereof is not a cornerstone of Buddhist teachings. The Buddha taught that the idea of god has its origins in fear. Early humans lived in a world full of dangers and created the idea of god to comfort them. Even now this can still be seen: in times of crisis people still claim that through god's power, they survived. The Buddha didn't believe in god because there is no evidence to support that idea. Most religions believe that they have the true word of god in their holy book, that they alone understand god's true nature and that only their god exists, but have no scientific evidence to support it.

quote:

the bible is a historical account from more than a dozen people over the course of hundreds of years

The bible is not a reliable historical account. Most historians do not acknowledge the bible as a history book. The main reason for this being that it has no collaborating sources or physical evidence to support it. The fact that it is written by several people over hundreds of years also refutes the statement that it is a historical account. Also many of the books are filled with hearsay, telling of events that supposedly happened hundreds, if not thousands of years prior to the writing of the Bible.

quote:

How is that somehow less credible than than Buddhism.

This is less credible than Buddhism because all of the Buddha's teachings can be reaffirmed by observing the real world.

quote:

I think this unanimous respect for Buddism is kind of lazy.

I would argue the opposite. I feel that blind belief in Christianity is lazy. Christians simply accept the teachings of Jesus without really thinking about them. Buddhism requires believers to prove for themselves that the Buddha's teachings are correct. Which one is lazier: Blind faith or deep meditation?

quote:

I will say that the thought behind Buddhism is interesting, but when I put my faith in a religion, I actually believe in it because i think it's true, not because it's the Coolest idea, i think the bible is a credible account. I don't think some guy's day dream is a credible account.

That is the most ignorant part of your post. No true Buddhist is a Buddhist because it is the "coolest idea," they believe it because it is backed up by evidence that they can see for themselves in the real world. Saying that the Buddha's enlightenment was only a daydream shows the true extent of your ignorance. Over a period of six years the Buddha traveled and experimented and meditated and learned from the great thinkers of his time. Through these experiences he came to realize the nature of the world. His discovery was so profound that he sat in the same spot for 45 days. That, my friend, is no mere daydream.

^ Don't take these people too seriously. Half of them don't know shit anyway.

[This message has been edited by ---Beany--- (edited 02-17-2004).]

Good post freemind!

Buddhism, which can hardly be classified as a "religion", is the only "religion" which accepts all religions. Buddhists never fight crusades, kill in the name of "God", or force others to believe in their own beliefs.

Just want to give kudos to freemind, beany, ilbastardoh, W 40oz2Freedom W, phrensied rabbit and all other buddhists. After reading through numerous comments, I would have to say that yours were the most understanding, something we need a lot of in this world. I'm glad to see, despite all the negativity and intolerance, that there are a few out there that have the courage to walk the neutral path, where you are sided with no one, and in all directions you are subject to the hate and criticism of others. It is not an easy path that we choose as the banner carriers for all of humanity. We have different beliefs, but choose the road of neutrality, not through inactivity, but through love and understanding. Not all roads are the same for all people. And we have figured that out, though I am afraid that our numbers are few, but at least with people like you and others there is hopefully a chance for peace and mutual respect.

quote:Originally posted by homosuperior:

Buddhists never fight crusades, kill in the name of "God",

But they do kill for what they believe in, which is the same thing as killing in the name of God.

<A HREF="http://www.quangduc.net/BoTatQuangDuc/Tuthieu.jpg">http://www.quangduc.net/BoTatQuangDuc/Tuthieu.jpg" width="90" height="90 (http://www.quangduc.net/BoTatQuangDuc/Tuthieu.jpg" width="90" height="90)</A>

quote:

But they do kill for what they believe in, which is the same thing as killing in the name of God.

Yes, Buddhists do kill for what they believe in, but they only kill themselves. Buddhists hold all life sacred and recognize that they have no right to take another person's life. Note in your picture that the Buddhist monk has only lit himself on fire. (Also that picture is the the cover to Rage Against the Machine's first album)

Also thanks to homosuperior for your acknowledgement and kindness.

Well, I'm sorry for having offended Freemind. It's never my intention to hate on another religion. I do think Sporkius' statement of "Buddhism is Bullshit" would be more offensive to a true Buddhist than my total ignorance towards it.

HOWEVER.

My doubts about buddhism are still valid i think. ilbastardoh had a good point when he mentioned the stories in pagan folklore that appear before christianity. However, would you like to know something else that existed hundreds of years before Christianity? The Bible. The Old testament is old as hell. Even long before it was written it was common knowledge among the jews, it was their oral tradition.

Sporkius said he doesn't belive any religion fully, but he can follow their teachings. Well, what do you do when it starts talking about reincarnation or forgiveness of sins? You can trust it enough to pattern your life by it but not truly believe in it. Why would you practice what you don't believe in?

When scientists submit their findings, hundreds of other scientists then try to refute their findings by examining all the evidence. That's my rational for wondering why a religion that comes directly from one person's view of the universe is considered credible among "intellectuals", when a document that is comprised of dozens of people's common view of the universe is not.

The reason i say Buddhism is made up and Christianity isn't is because all of Buddhism comes from one person's thoughts completely. The new testament is, well a testament from people who believe that they spent their life in the presence of the son of god. The basis of it comes from 4 eyewitnesses. If it was one person who was "visited by god" and went and told people, I'd be more sceptical of it, but that's not what we're given.

quote:This is less credible than Buddhism because all of the Buddha's teachings can be reaffirmed by observing the real world.

Buddhism makes claims about the afterlife don't they? What observations proved that we get reincarnated after we die?

And you're absolutly correct that blind faith is lazy. But I'm not really talking about believers. I'm talking about the way that "Spiritual, not religious" people percieve two faiths. If you (Freemind) truly believe in Buddhism, I have nothing against you at all, and i wish you well, but i believe in something that gets snickered at by most "thinking" people and you believe in something that they are willing to accept as intellectually sound. I'm trying to make the claim that it is no more intellectually sound than what i believe.

Wow, Lengthy post,

theBishop

Actually......

Buddihsm's texts were also written by a bunch of the "budda's" followers, handed down first as oral tradition.

The old testament, speaks of a funny god. Tyrannical, Jealous, Petty, Vindictive, Murderous. Then goes on to pull some shit like the 10 commandments. This do as I say and not as I do attitude, is the worst way for a father, or any parent for that matter, to behave. You are going to tell me that god in his omnipotence, omniecense, and omniwhateverthefuck, couldn't realize this? I guess God suffers from the human defect, too much ingenuity, not enough common sense.

P.S. I'm not Buddihst, but they have pretty good ideas, and I respect that. Even christianity has SOME pretty good ideas, but not enough to warrant full belief in their institution. Same goes for the rest of religions, even new age.

am i the only person that thinks its weird that most of the complaints and bad things i have heard about budhism is not that there is not evidence, rather that it is "too idealistic". I think a lot of people find it not good vs bad enough, no heaven and no hell. Most people find it hard to believe the world works like that. Budhism is often viewed as a fad religion, which is a bullshit and undeserved reputation.

quote:

I do think Sporkius' statement of "Buddhism is Bullshit" would be more offensive to a true Buddhist than my total ignorance towards it.

Personally, I didn't find Sporkius' statement to be that offensive, simply because he didn't signal out Buddhism, but declared all religions to be bullshit.

quote:

That's my rational for wondering why a religion that comes directly from one person's view of the universe is considered credible among "intellectuals", when a document that is comprised of dozens of people's common view of the universe is not.

The Buddha's teachings are credible because they can be backed up by any person who takes the time to make simple observations. Quite frankly, alot of the stuff in the bible cannot be backed up in the same way. There are no massive floods or women being turned into pillars of salt.

quote:

Buddhism makes claims about the afterlife don't they? What observations proved that we get reincarnated after we die?

The existence of reincarnation can be easily proven. First, for the sake of the arguement, assume karma is real. That means that bad things only happen to bad people (simplified explaination). So, then how come children in, say, Africa, are starving? They don't have the strength to do any so horrible that they deserve to starve. The reason for their starving is that in their previous life, they died with bad karma, which is then carried over to this life.

quote:

i believe in something that gets snickered at by most "thinking" people and you believe in something that they are willing to accept as intellectually sound. I'm trying to make the claim that it is no more intellectually sound than what i believe.

Any truly intelligent person would realize that the basic ethics taught by Christianity are good and pure. Most of the "snickering" is at the current state of the organized Christian religion (the whole thing with the Catholic priests and the crusades, crazy far right-wing Christians like Bush). I think most intellectual people believe Buddhism is more intellectually sound than Christianity, simply because it can be backed up by facts. That is what intellectual people understand, cold, hard facts. However, this doesn't make Christianity any less morally sound than Buddhism. In their raw ethical beliefs both are nearly identical. This makes belief in one just as good as belief in the other. Neither is superior to the other, one is just backed up by facts, while the other is backed up by faith.

I assume we have nothing but lay Buddhists here? You do realize that both Buddhism and Jainism taught that ALL karma was bad. Buddha taught that desire chained us to life, and that life was the cause of suffering. Therefor free yourself from desire, and you free yourself from the cycle of reincarnation.

And how has reincarnation been proven any more than Heaven? Remembering past lives? Thats what we call "psychological and hypnotist bullshit". You're right about Buddha being anti-deitic, and it is to idealist to work amongst normal people. Hence why you're a "lay Buddhist" (can't remember the proper name). In real Buddhism you aren't even allowed to do work. You have to subsist on charity.

Anyone on this board someting other than a Zen Buddhist?

Bhuddism is nice and all, but it still makes outrageous claims about reincarnation and such. Plus, it is still a teaching, and anyone who seeks a teacher and follows that teacher is bound to miss the point as words are a poor method of communication, only personal experience could get to someone what Bhuddism tries to explain.

quote:that there are a few out there that have the courage to walk the neutral path, where you are sided with no one, and in all directions you are subject to the hate and criticism of others

"Walking the neutral path" is the opposite of courage. You can't just sit on the fence and not share your views, if everyone did that there'd be no argument. You're not subject to the criticism of others, you're subject to the criticism of no one (at least not in relation to the argument).

quote:Christianity's bullshit. Islam's bullshit. Jeudaism is bullshit. Hinduism is bullshit. Seikhism is bullshit. Buddhism is bullshit

When I said this I meant "I don't really believe in the spiritual side of any religion". I was a bit pissed off at the time.

quote:Sporkius said he doesn't belive any religion fully, but he can follow their teachings. Well, what do you do when it starts talking about reincarnation or forgiveness of sins? You can trust it enough to pattern your life by it but not truly believe in it. Why would you practice what you don't believe in?

You can still read scripture and think "wouldn't it be great if everyone did try to love their neighbour, tried not to be envious of others etc. Maybe I should try to realise when I'm being jealous and ignore it, and try to show some degree of respect to everyone no matter what my opinion of them" without having to believe that Jesus is the son of God or that we will be born again when we die into a different life which is affected by our actions in this one.

The only real beef I have with buddhisim is the whole desire thing. You cannot under any circumstances eliminate desire. Trying to have no desire is desire non the less. You can't eliminate it only trade the one you got for something else.

quote:Originally posted by theBishop:

Buddhism makes claims about the afterlife don't they? What observations proved that we get reincarnated after we die?



Ok..so a guy meditates under a tree for 45 days and finds out about all his past lives and see how they are connected with karma...and tells us in short so that we dont have to waste our time in knowing that reincarnation exists. You want proof, go and do what the Buddha did. See for yourself!

quote:Originally posted by ilbastardoh:

The only real beef I have with buddhisim is the whole desire thing. You cannot under any circumstances eliminate desire. Trying to have no desire is desire non the less. You can't eliminate it only trade the one you got for something else.

Exactly, in trying to have no desire you're showing your desire for purity, and creating a desire to have no desire. Maybe it's just the act of trying to be rid of desire, of being aware that it's a negative force and should be ignored that is considered a virtue.

Eliminating desire is something I cannot do, but it's something I can aspire too. That's gotta be worth something...

The Bible was written by many people, people who are not in the current bibles. Each one of them often contradict eachother or just don't agree. And it has been edited and translated many times, often losing a definition or two.

Excuse my ignorance, Wasn't budha fat? He must have had some crazy desire there. Or I guess he never did anything to lose it, maybe he had no desire to be skinny. Desire is a part of life and I don't believe there is anything more to life than life. I think the meaning of life is to live, I tell people that is the meaning of life. Life exists, and it moves. I don't beleive in any kind of karm but in natural events, pretty much random because life and energy must always move. Bad people taking away from people and causing bad things to happen. Everyone should live, embrace life wherever it may be.

I'm probably going to go and try the tree thing for 45 days when I have that much time on my hands. I think I can do it, my object in life is to realy just live... to not need these things I have. Independency from corporate companies and the such is what I want. I just haven't had the chance to leave my family and wander.

I wish in my lifetime that humans could reach some kind of point where we could not hurt our planet. Internet is a wonderfull thing and I hope it stays around, and it will. The technology just has to evolve to a harminous point though.

Budhism is not based completely on fact but is based on a view of life. The view is a good view much like most parts of christianity. You can find facts in many religions or groups but none that i can think of at the moment are completely fact. They are full of views that attempt to explain the meaning of life but none can be proved and need to be explained themselves. The only facts I know is what I see, and what I see is life. I don't think there is an explanation past that. But as I was writing this I think i might be changing my views... maybe life can be explained, but that also has a reason, and reasons behind reasons. Like an atom... if an atom does go on forever in smaller and smaller particles. Now I guess I'm gonna go think for awhile.

[This message has been edited by jm5k (edited 02-20-2004).]

I don't think that people that starve for 7 years turn out fat. Artists renditions don't always portray truth, take jesus for example, he wasn't white, but the artist's rendition paints him that way.

Lol, it wasn't realy the main theme of my post anyways..

The reason I believe stronger in the Buddhist path than any other path (and no I would not consider myself a zen buddhist but a mahayana mainstream buddhist-and not much of one at that) is because there are more "real" buddhists in the world than there are "real" muslims, or christians or jews. Islam is supposedly the religion of acceptance, but their leaders and their texts call for the destruction of the infidel. No, Islam is NOT the enemy, but it thinks you are. Judaism is an ancient religion that now has become little more than a racial identity amongst the Judaic people. Buddhism has hundreds of millions of followers that make whole-hearted daily attempts to live up to the teachings of their Shakyamuni. Christian movements commonly call to support the death penalty, "just war" and other such hypocritical nonsense. My Franciscan Friar scripture teacher tells me that even though a war can be "justified" that doesn't make it right, and that doesn't make the killing any less of a sin. Then why is it justified?

During Vietnam when Buddhists immolatd themselves in Vietnam in protest to the suffering of their fellow people, they were not killing. In the Buddhist scriptures there are some obscure references to self-immolation as a viable act of self-sacrifice to support a cause or idea. Its true. This is not considered suicide, which you suffer for if you do it out of trying to escape the pain of this world, but is a sanctified, holy "maneuver" for lack of a better word.

Out there, there are real christians. Example: The people who work at the Catholic Worker programs. Their Lord told them to take in the sick and the homeless and the hungry and to feed them and take care of them, and they do it. They make it their lifes mission to follow the teachings of Jesus the Christ. Thats is extremely honorable and worthy of respect. We should also make more effort to support things like that, or ideas like that and it would definately make our world a better place.

quote:Originally posted by jm5k:

...Excuse my ignorance, Wasn't budha fat?...

I don't know much about budha, but I've noticed a lot of eastern art depicting great people as having a large gut. As far as I know, this isn't a physical trait, but symbolic, like it's where our 'soul' might be, for want of a better term. Our center of gravity is around that point, and some martial arts (like aikido) place great emphasis on that area.

-Quote The existence of reincarnation can be easily proven. First, for the sake of the arguement, assume karma is real. That means that bad things only happen to bad people (simplified explaination). So, then how come children in, say, Africa, are starving? They don't have the strength to do any so horrible that they deserve to starve. The reason for their starving is that in their previous life, they died with bad karma, which is then carried over to this life.

-Quote-

Your argument relies on a base assumption (karma). Your argument does not go on to prove this gumption, and so it fails.

Lets not assume karma is real. Be objective and observant. It seems to me that there are other possible solutions to starving children. e.g. it could be they just happen to be born where there is little food.

If you can prove that karma exists, reincarnation looks likely. But you haven’t in the above example. I'm curious. Can you try to prove karma to me?

quote:

You do realize that both Buddhism and Jainism taught that ALL karma was bad. Buddha taught that desire chained us to life, and that life was the cause of suffering. Therefor free yourself from desire, and you free yourself from the cycle of reincarnation.

As far as I know, the Buddha never said that karma was bad. The desire to have good karma is bad, but not karma itself.

quote:

Buddha taught that desire chained us to life, and that life was the cause of suffering. Therefor free yourself from desire, and you free yourself from the cycle of reincarnation.

Wrong. The Buddha taught that desire chained us to the material world, not life. Life is not the cause of suffering either. Desire is the cause of suffering. That's a key part of Buddhism, the second of the four Noble Truths. And ending the cycle of reincarnation is not as simple as giving up desire. Reincarnation only ends when a person has achieved enlightenment. Giving up desire is part of that enlightenment, but not all.

quote:

In real Buddhism you aren't even allowed to do work. You have to subsist on charity.

Sorry, but you are wrong again. Both of those are only required if you are a monk. In fact, the Buddha talks about right livelihood.

Also, I choose not to affiliate myself with any sect of Buddhism. I am simply a Buddhist.

quote:

Your argument relies on a base assumption (karma). Your argument does not go on to prove this gumption, and so it fails.

True, however, I was not attempting to prove the existance of karma. But, now, for your benifit, I will show you how you can prove to yourself that karma is real. First, think back to a time you were especially nice/helpful to someone. Being nice to that person felt good, right? Now, think to a time when you were especially mean to someone. Being mean to that person made you feel bad, right? That is a simplified explaination, but I think it works.

quote:

It seems to me that there are other possible solutions to starving children. e.g. it could be they just happen to be born where there is little food.

True, but why were they born in an area where there is little food? Why that soul? The answer is karma from a past life.

Right. So then karma is feeling good about doing good things, and bad about bad things. That’s funny; I call this conscience, or a form of emotion.

If that is all karma is, then it’s just a frame of mind. I thought it was a sort of good/bad score, that determined what happened to you in life and death (do a good thing. This immutable score makes more good things happen). The description you gave me does nothing to explain starving children to me. I thought it was a sort of good/bad score that determined what happened to you in life or death (do-good thing This immutable score makes more good things happen)

Unless of course there is some process by which your state of mind sends you back to the world I a new body. Or there is some kind of independent impartial tally of all the times you did something/felt someway about something, and THIS puts you in a new body.

Which is what I asked you about. Prove there is such a process. As it is, I don’t see an obvious link between my feelings and the possibility that I have a soul, and it’s coming back here after my death directed by those feelings.

quote:Right. So then karma is feeling good about doing good things, and bad about bad things. That’s funny; I call this conscience, or a form of emotion.

My point was not that you felt good or bad after doing things, it was that you are rewarded (with a good feeling) or punished (with a bad feeling) after doing a good or bad deed, respectively. It is a vastly oversimplified example, but it works.

Here's another example:

Two guys rob a store, and in the process kill a person. Later, when they are dividing up the money, they get into an arguement about who gets how much. The arguement escalates into a fight. One man shoots the other man and in the process, he is stabbed by the man he shot. They both die.

Karma is the result of your actions. It's causality. You do something bad, something bad happens to you. You do something good, something good happens to you. That is what I was trying to show in my first example. You can prove karma to yourself by simply observing the effects of your own actions.

Freemind- I suggest you go back and read your religious texts again. The simple fact that you left yourself an out in trying to tell me I'm wrong shows you don't truly know what you're talking about.

1. Both the Buddha and the Jain said that all karma was bad. You're using some hippy new age bullsit definition. I'm going from quote in a book written by disciples of the Buddha.

2. You're sophistry about the difference between life and the material world is bullshit too. Why do people suffer? Because they're alive. If they weren't alive, (or material, to placate your sophistry), then they wouldn't suffer. Giving up desire is the key to breaking free from the chain of reincarnation. If as you claim, there is more, than what is it?

3.You prove yourself a dumbass once again. Buddhist monks were not allowed to preform manual labor, which meant they had to subsist on the charity of commoners, which led to a complete dependence on lay peoples. lol. I have a college history test on this stuff next week. I know what the hell I'm talking about, and I'm getting my information from an Indian woman, who grew up in India, and is a Dr. of History. I think that beats out the "Buddhism for DUmmies", or idiot surfers you get your information from.

And the Buddha probably wasn't fat. He was all but starving himself right before he found the middle ground between wealth and poverty, and attained elightenment. Obesity is simply a sig of prosperity in most cultures. The little statues you see in homes and Chinese resturaunts is supposed to be a kind of good luck charm.

[This message has been edited by SurahAhriman (edited 02-24-2004).]

Talking about Karma. In India the main religeons also believe that good and bad karma is all bad. They believe that you need a clean slate to go back to god. If you have loadsa shit karma then you may spent your next life on a hellish planet to burn it off, but if you have loadsa good karma you may spend your next life on a heavenly planet.

[This message has been edited by ---Beany--- (edited 02-24-2004).]