Author Topic: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant  (Read 793 times)

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #15 on: July 19, 2017, 12:01:00 am »
Take out the ethics from Buddhism and you don't have much left. Put in the ethics of Buddhism, and you have an ooga-booga religion that is all about not hurting people and getting good stuff for doing good, bad stuff for doing bad, in sometimes hard to trace or justify ways.

This is wrong. In Buddhism, ethics in only an absolutely necessary foundation. Ethics alone cannot bring liberation, the goal of Buddhism. The same as Christianity. Paul (Saul) spoke lots about how ethics alone
 cannot set the mind free.

I'm not so totally certain that "ancient Buddhism" was really following the Western Scientific Model or Hyper-Atheistic model

From the beginning until now (as chanted by millions of Buddhists each day), the Dhamma is defined by the follow verse: 'This Dhamma is to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be by the observant for themselves'...

Since you are obviously not a Buddhist (because you do not even know the basics), I would suggest to stop flooding this forum with your New Age Mixed Religion; stop behaving as though you are a teacher.

 :namaste:
« Last Edit: July 19, 2017, 03:11:49 am by VisuddhiRaptor »

Offline ground

  • Member
  • Posts: 2027
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #16 on: July 19, 2017, 12:15:21 am »
I am looking for the truth,...
Hmh maybe not the best starting point to premise what one is looking for but hasn't been seen before.

That's saying like: not good to start the journey if you don't know what lies at the destination.
That is an invalid illustration. Why? Because one has seen many potential destinations already before one starts a journey. But you never have seen a truth when setting out to seek truth. you only imputed things to be true but there were many others that rejected your imputations and they could because you only imputed truth but there hasn't been any truth independent of your imputation.

So how many people actually know what career they want at the time of graduation?
Again an invalid illustration. Why? Because people know a diversity of potential careers already.

Or how many people know clearly what kind of partner they want when they start searching for a partner?
Again an invalid illustration. Why? Because people know a diversity of potential partners already.


I see I am, I see the world is. I don't know what it is and why it is. And the answers to these questions is what I call 'truth' that I am looking for.
What you merely call 'truth' isn't necessarily truth from its own side.

One has to start from somewhere. Going by your argument, there won't be anything like truth.
Language has the word 'truth'. However truth has never existed as anything.

Offline The Artis Magistra

  • Member
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #17 on: July 19, 2017, 02:46:04 am »
Take out the ethics from Buddhism and you don't have much left. Put in the ethics of Buddhism, and you have an ooga-booga religion that is all about not hurting people and getting good stuff for doing good, bad stuff for doing bad, in sometimes hard to trace or justify ways.

This is wrong. In Buddhism, ethics in only an absolutely necessary foundation. Ethics alone cannot bring liberation, the goal of Buddhism. The same as Christianity. Paul (Saul) spoke lots about how ethics alone
 cannot set the mind free.

I'm not so totally certain that "ancient Buddhism" was really following the Western Scientific Model or Hyper-Atheistic model

From the beginning until now (as chanted by millions of Buddhists each day), the Dhamma is defined by the follow verse: 'This Dhamma is to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be by the observant for themselves'...

Since you are obviously not a Buddhist (because you do not even know the basics), I would suggest to stop flooding this forum with your New Age Mixed Religion; stop behaving as though you are a teacher.

 :namaste:

Didn't you suggest earlier you're just some sort of sympathizer who thinks that you know the religion? Someone who reads the Suttas and thinks you know what they mean?

Tell me about all the other "Not Buddhists", like those many in the various schools who also "don't even know the basics" and seem to suggest ethics are important and that Buddhism is now being actively corrupted by people who are not of Buddhist heritage or did not grow up Buddhist and are just Western Science type Atheists?

In any case, use this opportunity to clarify what is a Buddhist and is not a Buddhist and if you wish, how ethics does not play an important role in Buddhism and is "New Age" because it seems to be rather old in age. You are unlikely to recognize the majority population of Mahayana Buddhist schools and history thought right?

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #18 on: July 19, 2017, 02:50:24 am »
Language has the word 'truth'. However truth has never existed as anything.

You are regressing back to your former ways. If truth doesn't exist, then what you posted above is also non-sense; i.e. not true.

The Lord Buddha spoke about "truth" because what is true has a powerful liberating effect upon minds that are truthful.  :namaste:

Offline ground

  • Member
  • Posts: 2027
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #19 on: July 19, 2017, 02:56:23 am »
Language has the word 'truth'. However truth has never existed as anything.

You are regressing back to your former ways. If truth doesn't exist, then what you posted above is also non-sense; i.e. not true.
Language is language, language is not truth. If one applies language it may be applied appropriately according to linguistic convention or inappropriately.

The Lord Buddha spoke about "truth" because what is true has a powerful liberating effect upon minds that are truthful.  :namaste:
The buddha spoke about 'truth' to satisfy the innate truth habits of his audience and to attract their attention.

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #20 on: July 19, 2017, 03:04:06 am »
Didn't you suggest earlier you're just some sort of sympathizer who thinks that you know the religion?

Buddhism not really a "religion".

Quote
Someone who reads the Suttas and thinks you know what they mean?

Expertise? Certainly.

Quote
Tell me about all the other "Not Buddhists"

My point was you are obviously not a Buddhist based on what you have posted so far on this forum.

Quote
like those many in the various schools who also "don't even know the basics" and seem to suggest ethics are important and that Buddhism is now being actively corrupted by people who are not of Buddhist heritage or did not grow up Buddhist and are just Western Science type Atheists?

The Buddha summarised his entire teaching as follows:

(1) Avoid evil

(2) Do good

(3) Purify the mind

Purify the mind is what makes the above uniquely Buddhist.

There are unlearned Buddhist that many not understand this but all learned Buddhists understand this, which is why Rahul & myself completely agreed with eachother with our posts here.

Quote
In any case, use this opportunity to clarify what is a Buddhist and is not a Buddhist

Buddhists take refuge in the Triple Gem. Where as you take refuge in other religions & arts.

Quote
and if you wish, how ethics does not play an important role in Buddhism

Both Rahul & myself explained this matter clearly. I could not have been more clear by stating ethics is an "absolutely necessary foundation". Please refrain from slandering me. Thank you.

Buddhism teaches about five precepts, the 4th is honest speech. Please refrain from lying about me. Thank you.

Quote
You are unlikely to recognize the majority population of Mahayana Buddhist schools and history thought right?

I said nothing about Mahayana. All I said is you are obviously not a Buddhist because you are here posting many non-Buddhist things.

Mahayana does not teach about "God". Mahayana teaches about various "deities" or "Bodhisatva", which represent higher beings rather than "God", in the manner you have posted about "God".

 :twocents:

Offline VisuddhiRaptor

  • Member
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #21 on: July 19, 2017, 03:07:36 am »
The buddha spoke about 'truth' to satisfy the innate truth habits of his audience and to attract their attention.

You were there, with Buddha? Give it a rest. Thanks

Without "truth", i.e., lawful coherence, everything would be very confusing.  :dharma:

Offline Rahul

  • Member
  • Posts: 137
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #22 on: July 19, 2017, 04:14:21 am »
The buddha spoke about 'truth' to satisfy the innate truth habits of his audience and to attract their attention.

You were there, with Buddha? Give it a rest. Thanks

Without "truth", i.e., lawful coherence, everything would be very confusing.  :dharma:

I guess he loves arguments.

Offline Solodris

  • Member
  • Posts: 331
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #23 on: July 19, 2017, 05:11:34 am »
The buddha spoke about 'truth' to satisfy the innate truth habits of his audience and to attract their attention.

You were there, with Buddha? Give it a rest. Thanks

Without "truth", i.e., lawful coherence, everything would be very confusing.  :dharma:

I guess he loves arguments.

From a Mahayana perspective it seems that the Theravadan standpoint on mental formation would inter-connect with the definition of Asuras. Devas always win over Asuras in the Mahayana tradition which could infer that the consciousness which cognizes in the Theravadan tradition should be ultimately used as a tool for getting the Asuras or mental formations to get along by the practice of generosity.

This should be considered a skillful practice to calm down the waters in the example of argumentation. Take for example also the Akshobhya nondualist wisdom reflection in the Vajrayana tradition.

Any authority on this?

Offline Solodris

  • Member
  • Posts: 331
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #24 on: July 19, 2017, 05:39:57 am »
I suppose my post was a matter of self-reflection rather than an actual point. I should exercise this as a dawn of rational communication.

Offline The Artis Magistra

  • Member
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #25 on: July 19, 2017, 11:58:54 am »
Didn't you suggest earlier you're just some sort of sympathizer who thinks that you know the religion?

Buddhism not really a "religion".

Quote
Someone who reads the Suttas and thinks you know what they mean?

Expertise? Certainly.

Quote
Tell me about all the other "Not Buddhists"

My point was you are obviously not a Buddhist based on what you have posted so far on this forum.

Quote
like those many in the various schools who also "don't even know the basics" and seem to suggest ethics are important and that Buddhism is now being actively corrupted by people who are not of Buddhist heritage or did not grow up Buddhist and are just Western Science type Atheists?

The Buddha summarised his entire teaching as follows:

(1) Avoid evil

(2) Do good

(3) Purify the mind

Purify the mind is what makes the above uniquely Buddhist.

There are unlearned Buddhist that many not understand this but all learned Buddhists understand this, which is why Rahul & myself completely agreed with eachother with our posts here.

Quote
In any case, use this opportunity to clarify what is a Buddhist and is not a Buddhist

Buddhists take refuge in the Triple Gem. Where as you take refuge in other religions & arts.

Quote
and if you wish, how ethics does not play an important role in Buddhism

Both Rahul & myself explained this matter clearly. I could not have been more clear by stating ethics is an "absolutely necessary foundation". Please refrain from slandering me. Thank you.

Buddhism teaches about five precepts, the 4th is honest speech. Please refrain from lying about me. Thank you.

Quote
You are unlikely to recognize the majority population of Mahayana Buddhist schools and history thought right?

I said nothing about Mahayana. All I said is you are obviously not a Buddhist because you are here posting many non-Buddhist things.

Mahayana does not teach about "God". Mahayana teaches about various "deities" or "Bodhisatva", which represent higher beings rather than "God", in the manner you have posted about "God".

 :twocents:

No one is slandering you, you are slandering me. What you deem as "Not Buddhist", a person writing such supposedly does not indicate a person is not a Buddhist nor that a person is not familiar with all sorts of things you may or may not deem "Buddhist" or "Buddhist enough". You are the one who suggested or implied you are a wheelchair bound Australian who thinks you know and determine the true meaning of Suttas you have read, I don't know who or what you are except based on what you yourself implied in your writings, if that isn't so then simply indicate the corrections, that is not slander. Going around saying to people "You are not Buddhist" based on your decision to deem some content as "Not Buddhist" and that Buddhists are somehow restricted from making any statements you deem "Not Buddhist" as a clear determination of things, indicates more about you than it does about me.

You sound like you might have an obsessive compulsive sort of relationship with the Suttas you have read, and a Colonial desire in your heart to wheel up to all the ethnic heritage Buddhists and tell them what words they are allowed to use which qualify themas Buddhist or not. You may want to change up the Wheelchair you implied to me you are suffering in, for an old fashioned British war ship (A wheel chair on the war ship might roll around too much or throw you overboard, so you should be tied to it like you are tied to the Suttas and the ship should be called The Dhamma), and then travel to all the Buddhist heritage sites and fire away with your Canon of Decisive Knowledge. After conquering the frightened and terrified people, you can then divide them strictly according to you law, saying who is a Buddhist and who is not, and of course anyone who uses Non Buddhist terms or tries for syncretism like those wicked Non Buddhists who composed the majority of Buddhists for the majority of time can simply be excluded from Buddhism and told they are unworthy. Will they then be free to use Buddhist terms or the word Buddhism or is that a trademark of the East India Company now sir? Master sir. Would you like some tea?

Offline The Artis Magistra

  • Member
  • Posts: 455
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #26 on: July 19, 2017, 12:10:10 pm »
I suppose my post was a matter of self-reflection rather than an actual point. I should exercise this as a dawn of rational communication.

Feel free to keep posting. The less overly technical and fully explained in simple terms the more visitors and newcomers may be able to gain from it as well.

Offline Rahul

  • Member
  • Posts: 137
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #27 on: July 20, 2017, 12:09:58 am »
The Artis Magistra, you should consider that you are free to call yourself a Buddhist.

But you won't get recognition from those who have studied Buddhist literature and have undertaken some practices. There is the original pali canon called 'tipitaka', Mahayana suttas, zen koans and suttas, etc. to name a few. There is practice of mindfulness, meditation, eight-fold path, compassion, contemplation, etc. practiced by various schools of Buddhism. There is a symbolism in present-day Buddhism: symbols representing the dhamma, triple gems, Buddha's symbolic representation, yantras, mandalas, etc. There are some ceremonies, some rituals.  There are some precepts for laymen. There is a vocabulary with special meaning, there are some concepts with more or less common meaning to all schools: emptiness, impermanence, no-self...

It's a deep subject. And from your posts, it is evident you are not familiar with these at all. And you are misinterpreting even basic concepts. So how do you expect to get recognition from other members who have spent years or decades in studying and practicing these?

You keep asking what is Buddhism and why people think you are not a Buddhist. Well, you would be in a better position to answer for yourself if you studied and practiced some of those I listed above.

Offline ground

  • Member
  • Posts: 2027
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #28 on: July 20, 2017, 12:42:44 am »
The buddha spoke about 'truth' to satisfy the innate truth habits of his audience and to attract their attention.

You were there, with Buddha? Give it a rest. Thanks
you weren't there either. So on what grounds are you doubting what I say?

Without "truth", i.e., lawful coherence, everything would be very confusing.  :dharma:
The opposite is the case. With 'truth' it would be very confusing that the world know countless incompatible views and that every community of believers asserts their beliefs to be true.

Offline Rahul

  • Member
  • Posts: 137
    • View Profile
Re: Modern Buddhism is unpleasant
« Reply #29 on: July 20, 2017, 12:57:59 am »

Without "truth", i.e., lawful coherence, everything would be very confusing.  :dharma:

The opposite is the case. With 'truth' it would be very confusing that the world know countless incompatible views and that every community of believers asserts their beliefs to be true.


Ground you are confusing truth with the 'claim something to be true'. The word 'truth' can be abused knowingly or unknowingly. The truth exists, either Buddha was born, or he was not. Or Either there was a set of teachings that Buddha gave (which would, in common sense, would qualify to be 'original' Buddhism) or there had never been such 'original' Buddhism. The truth exists, but people don't know and claim this or that to be truth. Things are not complicated by the concept of the truth, things are complicated by contradicting claims of what is truth.

Anyways, it seems that you like to argue a lot for the sake of arguing. Finding loopholes in explanations and then finding implications of loopholes to have fun etc. while ignoring the crux of the argument etc. Which is a skill in its way, but just how beneficial? It doesn't help anyone, including you.

But you are free to continue your practice of dissecting sentences and applying your standards of logical interpretation etc. if that gives you fun.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal