Considering the contributions from various individuals throughout history, I am struck by the fact that, perhaps excluding Siddhartha Gautama, I cannot find any significant contributions to society from Buddhists. Why is that? Is it because Buddhism preaches laziness and detachment as a way of life? If it was just the preaching of detachment that is at issue, then why doesn't Hinduism or related religions also suffer from this problem?

In any event, my contention remains that: Buddhists have contributed nothing significant to society.

This fact alone should make one very wary of the tenets of Buddhism in general, lest we fall prey to sloth. If anyone can think of any significant contributions to society from Buddhists, besides Siddhartha, let's hear it.

hmm, I generally have more respect for buddhism than most other religions, mainly the ideals that the first buddah preached are not to blindly follow the teachings. He asks that people subject what is taught to their own opinions and make their own decisions about it instead of just being told what to think. Also isnt the Dali Lama a buddhist? I mean besides the whole reincarnation thing, they seem to generally try to promote world peace and passive negotiations..

Ok, the Dali Lama is a Buddhist who may or may not have made significant contributions to society. Besides writing some books, and being a political hot potato, what else has he done?


Btw, I am not trying to put Buddhism in a bad light. I am just curious what particular Buddhists have actually contributed to society.

Mostly the peace thing I suppose, they are against war and what not. Also I think they do a lot of helping world wide, with giving people refuge in their monasataries and trying to bring them to peace. The thing I like about Buddhism is it isnt like most religions, it doesnt have a god, it believes people deserve to be treated equally and they preach enlightenment instead of being another sheep under a god. (not that buddhists havent been sheep, they just dont preach being sheepies lol) Anyways the two major things I like, that they preach enlightenment instead of being a god fearing fool and they ask you to subject their teachings to your own opinions. If Buddhism does nothing else for society at least it gets people away from Christianity? lol

My own thoughts are that Buddhism is incomplete. It is a tool. "Buddhists" are people who erroneously accept Buddhism as complete truth and fail to see it for the tool that it is. It is but a piece in a bigger puzzle.

I encourage the wise to put the sword to Buddhism. Extract and use the tool that Buddhism is, but destroy all the useless fluff, dogma, and lies.

Indeed, their is fluff and whatnot, certainly useful aspects of buddhism exist, but not all of them. It is about enlightenment not following, so I agree, use what you can to raise your own conciousness and leave the rest behind.

What are the most significant contributions to society ?
Don´t you think that the answer to this significant question depends on our values and state of consciousness ?
Which are the values of the western society or civilization ?
Certainly, self-realization, enlightenment, buddhahood, wisdom, joy, unity of consciousness, are not among our highest values.

A professor of philosophy went to the Zen master and asked him about God, meditation, meaning of life, and other things. The master listened silently and then said, "You look tired, you have come from a faraway place. Let me first serve you tea.
Relax ! Who knows...maybe by drinking tea all your questions will be answered."
The professor was eager, impatient ... He started wondering whether his whole journey had been a waste. He thought, "The man seems to be mad. How can my questions about God be answered by drinking tea ?"
But he was tired, and it would be good to have a cup of tea before going back.
The master brought the kettle and started pouring tea into the cup...and continued pouring the tea,although the cup was already full and the tea started overflowing into the saucer.
"Stop! What are you doing !?" shouted the professor.
"That´s exactly the situation you are in," answered the master, "Your mind is so full of questions that even if I answer, there is no space in your head for my answer to go in. Go back, empty your cup; first create some space in you."

The western world has been living in such a hurry and stress that it has missed all the wisdom.

indeed the significance of contribution is reminiscent of our perception on whats significant guest, but thats exactly what Lucid is asking, what do you think the buddhists have contributed?

Maximus 242,
Maybe by drinking tea your question will be answered...

In other words, the Buddhists sit around doing nothing and contributing nothing to society, and when someone asks them why they contribute nothing, they respond by saying they are "wise".

Effete and delusional is what I call such wisdom.

Kung fu?

The best contribution to humanity is the Light of Wisdom

When I read the title of this topic I laughed out loud.

I'll answer your question with another:

How many negative things have non-Buddhists brought into the world, in comparison with how many negative things Buddhists brought?

Tell us: What kind of laughter was it?
If you meant that the topic is amusing, I don't agree. I find generalizations--dare I say it--offensive!

BTW, would one describe Richard Gere, the movie star, lazy?

Shinto, the most predominant form of religion in Japan, is an adaptation of Buddism. It would be interesting to find out what that form of ideology has contributed to the world through its followers. Maybe Culture could enlighten us on the subject...

Shinto is a native religion of Japan. It is a form of animism and unrelated to Buddhism.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shinto

It was a gut laugh caused by the the bold phrasing of the title and subtitle.

I'm not saying generalizations aern't offensive, but if the man has statistical evidence backing him we should at least consider his point, right?

Sure, I'd happily call Richard Gere lazy.

Statistical evidence such as names, history of activity, comparison analysis of human achievement and potential, and a point of reference for the standard of measure for human worthiness. Evidence of whether activity or belief of one or a group of people has an affect on others be it positive, negative or indifferent, long term, short term, isolated, widespread.

Can free will can be compromised or inluenced by a group mentality due to the nature of the group influence or are some people deluded by their own inability to differentiate truth from illusion.
If one doesn't stand for one thing will they just fall for another.. etc. etc.

Those kind of statistics?

By the way, do you know Richard Gere?

Joesus, I think the statistics speak for themselves. This is not a question of standards or worthiness, just the simple observation that Buddhists have constributed almost nothing significant to society, and I'm curious why that's the case. Any ideas?

Lucid, sometimes the tibetan buddhism needs to put into perspective? It is easy to cut the legs off of any position by refuting it as good scientists do.

But it is this perspective, and the environment that has existed for many a generation, that the mountains and terrain of Tibet, has forced its's society to develope in ways, that the societes of other cultures did not. This did not mean that "developement in consciousness studies" did not occur in those other societes.

So sure, there are contributions from all sides, that might be thought "useless," while the study of consciousness evolved very intricately from teacher to teacher. To cut the legs off of one teacher, did not stop what was progressive in that society? How could it, when it was disemminated amongst the population and hence forth, the "probability outcome," enormous, once others set their minds to it?

While the Dalai Lama exited Tibet, becuase of the CHinese, in absentism, he wrote a democratic constitution that was worthy of any democratic society. He studied this, in context of the current knowledge of societies who matured, and wrote constitutions for it's peoples. Even, when he annouced that he could be replaced, the people did not want to cut off the head? They knew to exit Tibet and live in INdia was the only way, to live in abstentia, while it could still rule it's people.

China has made no headway, even with all it's potential capabilties. Killing off all sectarian teachers of the different monestaries? Like students and their degrees, they had to earn their credentials as they move up in the ranks?

Sometimes the teachers were recognzied in the very early stages of youth, who came to resume the work they were doing.

Life clouds over the reason and developement of youth, to become dispersed in the new ideological formations of a contnued developement and growth of being. That's just the way it is time and time again.

Other Philosophical Incursions?

A Taoist may lie "indifferent," and in all appearances, be somewhat percieved as lazy, yet , it is in the observation mode, that such a equillibrium is struck, that they could move very quickly, while still remaining unattached? You see

Way to go Plato! I love your posts. They are deeper than The Grand Canyon, and it takes me awhile to get the full meaning of them, but they're full of content. By the way, I also like your writting style: Posing propositions with a question mark at the end... Sign of a wise man. Groovy!

thanks

Just like you, or anyone else.


Sometmes without another there to help propel us forward, we have to assess our summations as if in a question form. Sometimes, there is no other there to do this by asking the question, "what next," so we have to do this ourselves.

Wait a minute. Kung fu! It's the root of all eastern martial art, leading to Karate and Tai Kwan Do. Think of all the martial arts films we would be missing without the Shao Lin Buddhist Temple. What would Matrix be as a film without the fight scenes?

Yes statistics speak of a vision from a point of reference. I was responding to Adrians post that suggests you be given a chance to provide statistics so we might go beyond the generalized statement of your personal opinion, based on the observations made from your point of reference, (effects of human actions and beliefs according to your personal observations) which is directed towards societal significance or worth.

Taking a scientific approach might include statistical references to societal contributions of Grandmothers, Teenagers, politicians. Scientists who's contributions to society have resulted in the poisoning of our environment. Long term affects of progress in the name of dissatisfaction as opposed to inner stillness and movement created towards the education and understanding of universal harmony.

You aren't observing the bigger picture, you're only seeking a solution to the negative that you experience, rather than expanding on what is positive in the world.

What you focus on grows. Focus on dissatisfaction and that is the seed that grows. The Buddhists know this which is why they don't choose to be political activists attacking what is wrong with the world but to bring forth what is universal within us so that we may create from a more stable platform than the knowledge or feeling that everything is wrong.

This does not make one slothlike or lazy, it makes one more productive to creating a society that is in harmony with nature rather than one that seeks to dominate or control it with the negative affects that our current scentific and political mindset has created by attacking the needs of humanity based on projections of fear.

Your observations are not based on universal knowledge, they are hypothetical ideas based on your beliefs. You are attempting to gather statistics by seeking confirmation through others who have their own opinions and you hear what you want to hear. This is not science and you haven't provided any rational proof, or experience of having lived with or studied with all Buddhists to form a complete or comprehensive opinion.

Why should this topic be given any attention?

This rubbish hardly even merits discussion.

This is such a generalisation as to be very suspicious indeed. Has the writer ever asked a Buddhist "why have you contributed nothing to society?" and received the answer "because I am wise"? This might be subject to a great deal of doubt.

Buddhists are generally (or at least, supposed to be) compassionate, nonviolent, humble, unselfish - which is perhaps more than can be said for any other 'type' of person you might care to designate. The contribution of Buddhists to society is not in the form of grand scientific discoveries, but in the behaviour that manifests from those attributes. This results from the compassionate inclination to assuage the suffering of sentient beings. One can see the Buddhist community as being millions of hands trying to make the lives of humans (and other sentient beings) happier within their own spheres of influence.


One might ask lucid_dream, at this juncture: by what capacity of your own do you presume to advise the wise?


Perhaps you could help us to know what you mean by identifying some of Buddhism's lies. (defn.: statements made by someone who believes or suspects them to be false, in the expectation that the hearers may believe them).

A political hot-potato? Before you embarrass yourself any further, lucid, consider these facts about Tenzin Gyatso, the current Dalai Lama:

Since his country was occupied by China, he has lived in exile in India. He harbours the Chinese no public grudge.

In 1998, he pledged his support to the People's Republic of China's proposal to ban all weapons of mass destruction.

He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989.

In April 2005, TIME magazine listed him among their 100 most influential people in the world.

He has stated his belief that modern science takes precedence over ancient religions: "If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview."

He has written or co-authored 13 books, ranging from techniques for living happily, through his experiences of Tibet, to the convergence of science and spirituality. If you had read any of these, I think you would have been impressed by his lucidity. If you had ever heard him speak, you would also be impressed by his command of English, which is his second language.

For a complete list of the awards he has received, click here. There are fifty-five in all.

Capiche?

This is a good point. To claim that some belief system or culture has benefitted society or not one needs to define standards of benefit and that means defining "the good," a central philosophical question.

Perhaps the standard for historical impact might be the Crusades of the middle ages. Perhaps it might be the defeat of fascism by the Allies in the world wars. Maybe it's the peace movement in the USA that led to the ending of the war in Vietnam. Who can say?

WU WEI, or Actionless Action

There is a story of a traveler who arrived at a remote village that was suffering from an extreme drought. In their desperation the villagers had called in a taoist sage to bring about rain by magic. The sage came to the village, looked around carefully and talked to the inhabitants. Then he built himself a little shack outside the village. For three days and nights he remained inside. No one saw or heard him do anything. After three days the sage emerged from the shack and started to leave.
As he was leaving, it began to rain. The traveler was amazed and ran after the sage. "How did you bring the rain ?" he asked. The sage replied, " I didn´t make it rain. When I came to the village I saw that the inhabitants were out of harmony with Tao. So I sat in contemplation until I restored the harmony with Tao. And when there is harmony, the rains come naturally."

There's a good chance it ain't in the determination, or definition of having a high IQ. which is measured or standardized by another point of reference.

..and often leads to prideful actions based on delusional aggrandizement of ones opinion of ones self, and ones observations.......

You have for some reason changed the topic of this post to "human worthiness." If you read the first post in the topic you will see that Lucid is citing contributions to society.

I think we could argue that any person who is kind is making a positive contribution to society, but that would only be to confuse what we call an accomplishment.

In my mind it is something that benefits the greater majority of people. Let's take for example western medicine. Doesn't a scientific discovery that aides everyone in survival benefit everyone?

So now we are back to my humble opinion. I think if I do a Google search on what a contribution to society is, see what the word means to most people and we come to a general concensus on the meaning of the term, then we will find that statistics will agree with Lucid. Especially if we are searching in my native tongue, English.

Will this make it truth? No, almost nothing can be said to be truth. Scientifically viable? No, that would be a chore.

Just another opinion, like your own.





Why is it wrong to call someone lazy for only offering me intangibles? Why do you believe that universal harmony is a likelyhood when mankind has been at war since the dawn of history?



Doesn't this metaphor seem illogical to you? If I want my garden to look nice, I pull out all of the weeds first.





I don't know Richard Gere, but I have seen him on TV, and he looks lazy to me.

The topic still remains as it was.
If you look again he mentions significant contributions, implying what is worth valuing, (as in the English language) significant having or likely to have influence or effect : IMPORTANT (according to Webster) a comparative, (reference quote) (generalized statement supporting the comparison), without a value system or common point of reference to make the comparisons, other than self projected vague observations followed by the label of LAZY
(an adjective describing the character of said topic), hence setting in the original statement a value of worth, leading to labeling and or category of character or characters who are significant to humanity..


Then it becomes an issue of worth according to personal values. Possibly a short sighted observation as was demonstrated by Lao Tzu in reference to the ignorance of accomplishments and awards attained by the Dali Lama.

If a mother gives love and support to a child, that child will more than likely be more stable and productive than one who is denigrated for what it can't do and is punished for not living up to the parents expectations.
This being an example of positive nurturing Buddhists such as the Dali Lama and the like may provide positive reinforcement of the mind so that it is unobstructed in achieving goals, and clear in activity.
What you focus on grows.


That depends on the long term affects, and the natural course of the universe. Often people with best intentions step in front of and divert what is perceived as detrimental from taking its natural course of evolution in favor of a personal point of view.

Ever hear of Thalidomide?

I'll give you an example:
A man sees a struggling butterfly attempting to break free of its cocoon. The emerging butterfly appears stuck and unable to free itself. The man believes it is going to fail and die, so he cuts the cocoon and frees the butterfly. The butterfly then drops, spreads and flutters it's stubby wings, exhausted.
What the man doesn't realize is that the struggle stimulates growth hormones to make the butterflies wings grow and expand, and now that it is free the wings will forever remain stunted and the butterfly will never fly.
Science has over the years created antibiotics to fight certain diseases but the adverse affects are that the bacteria evolve and get stronger so that the antibiotics no longer work. The body that has grown dependant on the artificially created means of protection now no longer adapts itself to naturally fight the disease and the mind has been convinced it cannot without artificial means.

The misunderstanding of stress related diseases and the affects of curing the disease but not the cause, is a major factor in the hit or miss technological advancements of medical science. Doctors don't have an answer for every disease because the individual scenario (mental influence) is always a factor and often changes the outcome of prescribed standards.
There is an interesting thread regarding Placebos and the affects that the mind has on curing the body when it is fooled into believing it is getting a healing drug.
A healthy mind is conducive to a healthy body. Someone who is not stressed is less likely to fall ill than someone who is stressed.
What becomes significantly productive then is arranging thoughts in a direction that expands the minds ability to communicate with the body rather than subvert it through outside authorities, which do not understand the nature of reality.
In this case the Buddhist understanding of the nature of reality may be far superior to the programming of passed on human interventions based on theory and guesswork.


I'm still waiting for the statistics...English or otherwise.
Regarding your humble opinion...well... everyone has one don't they, and I'll bet you don't always listen to others if they don't agree with your own.

I think this is the underlying reality of the type pf messages that Lucid has been posting.
If he wants more he needs to fertilize and water what will grow and expand his growth rather than seek to destroy what he believes is hiding under his bed.
Most outgrow the boogeyman by the time they are 7 or 8.


Exactly, an opinion of Buddhists. Labeled as Lazy without any reference to first hand knowledge and presented as a less than intelligent or scientific proposal.
From the man who stated:
I'm thinking he's not the leading example of his religion, more than likely just a cheerleader.


Universal harmony is the underlying reality of all things which includes war, the outpicturing of the struggle of opposing beliefs. They are the hormones that create growth in the wings to our impending freedom from illusions of separation and duality. Man has continued to evolve past the need to fight, and to find resolution in the fact that life is the journey to Self realization.
Just because you haven't discovered it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just means you believe the nature of humanity is violent.
But look around you and observe the nature of things. Even when man destroys the things around him nature is stronger, and what he destroys comes back to resurrect itself.
It may take time but this underlying Truth is stronger in the nature of things than the destructive ignorance of humans who fight to the death for their changing opinions.
This is what all religions are based upon, the Truth of what underlies all things, the immortal being that resides in all things and is no thing.


If you want a Garden you have to plant it. This requires preparation and commitment to water the garden and to take care of it. In the bigger picture the desire for the garden is much more expanding and rewarding than focusing on the probability of weeds and then giving your attention to weeds rather than the Garden.

In life this is demonstrated by the mental focus of what one wants in life rather than what one doesn't want in life. If you have a goal in mind you don't focus on all the things you don't want or don't want to happen, you give your attention to what you want most and the rest of it takes care of itself, you will tend to the garden as is necessary without holding the negative thoughts that cause stress and make you weaker, causing you to get sick, age and die.

Those that focus on what they don't want don't achieve anything because there is no focus on anything but the changing thoughts of negativity. This creates stress in the mind and the body and eventually kills you.
It's like running a hamster wheel.

Good gardeners know how to plant certain types of plants in their gardens that repel pests. Preventing weeds is as much in the knowledge of good gardening or greater understanding of the whole as in promoting good health rather than taking medicine for something you might get but don’t have.
If you treat you mind and body like a garden then to prepare it for life would you take a baby and start weeding out what is wrong with it?


Well it is the opinion of some people that those who watch TV are mentally lazy and they usually have much to say about others in defense of their own shortcomings.

I have to say, "making the statement that Richard Gere looks lazy on TV" isn't a statement that impresses me as truth. But it does lead me to the thought of where your put your point of reference and authority.

Listen I can't even follow all of this hocus pocus. Showing the relatedness of individual words does not change the commonly understood meaning of the phrase.



Very true, these statements would be downright bold had I not prefaced them with the words 'in my mind' which you have for some reason omitted.



What other types of worth are there? Enlighten me. Worth in the eyes of god? Since we're talking about personal values, do you think I consider it amazing that someone who was born famous wrote a few books?



Let people die so evolution can progress? Sure.



I am sure there are plenty of people who would have been happy to die of things like infection and smallpox so that we can all get our winged growth hormones.



Fluff. Yes placebo's are amazing I'm sure, until we're talking about pneumonia.



http://www.adherents.com/adh_influ.html



Nobody's perfect. Right?



Who are you to say what is a superior method of achievement?



Joesus, you write long pages of nonsense. The ad hominem attacks are all that keeps me awake.

great link! Thanks.

I couldn't help noticing that Ascensionists don't even rank on the list! If they're all like Joesus, then it's not surprising that they have contributed nothing significant to society but rather play the role of societal gadfly.

Which reminds me, I wouldn't worry too much about Joesus. He somehow believes that the quantity of words in a post is related to the quality and that if he gets the last post he wins the argument, both of which are false. I have learned that he is oblivious to reason and that his method of argumentation/discussion is, well, infantile. You can't reason with an infant, you can only smile.

Holy Shit, I've achieved God status.

I think the key here is the projection of what is commonly understood.
Sorry you can't keep up, but I have faith, that in time, you shall rise above the limited scope of your personal reality.


I think omitting that fact would allow you to see where you are associating the Truth of what you are really saying. "In your mind" and "Commonly understood" by repeating yourself enough times so that you finally hear where you are coming from.


The point wasn't about the Dali Lama and his accomplishments. It was about associating accomplishments of personal value with the system of measure being created here and making mind created comparisons to support the labeling of All buddhists as being lazy.
Were back to personal opinion rather than common perception.


If that is the best you can surmise from what was said, then you aren't ready to comprehend any more than you do now. C'est la vie


Happiness relative to the nature of the universe is in the understanding of it. Death is a beginning not an end.


The reference is in the power of the mind. This is more than fluff, it's a reality.


What is this for, and what does this have to do with statistical evidence of Buddhism and its affect on humanity, and the justification of the label of lazy?
Are we still talking about your mind?

By the way Jesus was not the founder of Christianity,
Buddha was not the founder of Buddhism
Confucius was not the founder of Confucianism
and Paul was more of a founder of "the association and study" of Jesus' Teachings.
Proselytizer is such a limited observation. He threw his entire life into his work rather than just talking about someone elses. Unfortunately he tried to twist it to benefit himself but still there is much more to him than the label attached in this reference point of authority you found on the internet.

I did like the disclaimer that follows the list:
This list is compiled only for fun and reference. Certainly no theological or sociological inferences should be drawn from a subjectively chosen list of only 100 people from throughout human history. These individuals clearly transcend statistical sociological analysis. Nevertheless, it is fascinating to consider the varied ways in which the lives and contributions of nearly all of them were profoundly influenced by their religious background and personal beliefs.

So are you saying you might be off in your observations and personal beliefs?


Well that seems to be the fly in the ointment when your personal opinion isn't supported.


We're back to what is in your mind.

Wish I could say the same for you, Joesus.

Joesus, can't the old dog learn any new tricks? Your methods of manipulation are pretty transparent and weak. Did they teach you at black Ishaya school to dodge questions and repeatedly tell other people everything is in their mind?

Black Ishayas, what a joke! Are you related to Jehovah Witnesses? You remind me of fortune tellers and other pseudo-science mind-manipulation scam artists. Here's some advice: try to make more productive use of your time and contribute positively to society. Surely you can do that! can't you?

Btw, the point of the link above, which was very relevant to this discussion, was that it showed Buddhists only comprise 2% of significant contributors to society, disclaimer notwithstanding. In my own experience, I would say the figure is closer to 0%, which is why I started this thread to discuss what significant contributions, if any, Buddhists have made to society and if there is something in their belief system that prevents them from making significant contributions to society. In my opinion and experience, the Buddhist belief system encourages laziness and seems the ideal religion for the sloth-minded...

...kind of like yourself!

Beliefs are subject to change, and opinions are subject to beliefs.
I'm confident you won't remain stuck forever.

Wish I could say the same for you, Joesus.

lucid dream,
Don´t you think that it is wiser to ask oneself whether one is making any significant contribution to society ?
All that statistical evidence about Buddhism is valuable in the sense that it can make us question our own worth and contribution.

These statistics might be relevant if you are looking for a belief to stand by.

The presumed facts presented are a sampling, 100 well known people and the label of their religious affiliation.

2% of the people listed happened to be Buddhists. The Majority were of Catholic belief.

So how about those Catholics Lucid? They seem to be the most productive team to look for.

Ready to join up?

definitely! We should all be asking ourselves what we are contributing to society.




it would be interesting to examine whether there is some belief in Catholic christianity that promotes positively contributing to society. I suspect it has to do with the religion's emphasis on producing works. The question is whether we can apply a subset of Catholic christian beliefs to effect a positive response, without necessarily buying into the full baggage of dogmatism and other nonsense that is associated with it.

Nice, Plato. Perhaps that will be an end to this prejudiced idiocy parading as debate.

lucid dream,
I love Your response -- "Definitely! We should all be asking ourselves what we are contributing to society".
It is a truly honest and mature response.

Lao Tzu,
It´s useful to have such debates -- they make us more aware and turn us to ourselves.

By the way, do You know the story about Confucio and Lao Tzu ?
As

What is wrong with my projection? Stop to consider that my personal reality is a better point of reference than your own. You have said nothing to refute my statement. You just hurled some thinly veiled insult at me, and implied that in time I will come closer to your perfect state of being.



You thought it would be ok to change the meaning of my statement to teach me something?

Your second sentence doesn't really make sense. I think it is lacking some key words, if you repeat it to yourself enough times you will come to realize that.



I don't know why you are attacking the information I provide on the basis that this is an issue of personal opinion. You speak as if your statements are not opinion but metaphysical fact, handed down to you by the supreme creator.



Fluff! Please consider the possibility you are mortal from time to time, and do benefit from medical science.



And the Easter bunny didn't invent Easter. So what? The link was a visual aide to help you 'surmise' the topic of conversation.



Irrelevant. You just asked me for my hypothetical statistics which I was more than happy to provide.



Yes, it's called humility you should try it sometime.



Lunacy. How can you make such a baseless assertion?



You have no concept of the meaning of this phrase, because your mind is full of ancient pillowtalk.






Please refer to my above comment about the Dalai Lama's book.

I've noticed that a lot of people aren't actually contributing much more to this debate than arrogance and a pre-formed dislike/opposition to each other.

To answer the original question, I will say this: -

In general I don't think that religious ties have to do with productiveness of a people. Europe in the Dark ages under Christianity achieved very little. Yet, under the same religion, through the renaissance, the industrial age and up to the modern era, Europe has achieved probably more than any other continent.

Pagan Rome was an absolute success, yet, as Christianity became more and more prominent the Empire fell... I know that's a ridiculous line I'm taking, but it's to make a point. I believe that the success and "contribution" a people make, has more to do with what technology they are exposed to, the amount of time they have on their hands (i.e. Do they spend all day meditating), as well as a whole score of other things.

It also really depend (as others have said) what you mean by a contribution to society. I personally think that Buddhist texts, artwork and Architecture are all fantastic things that have been given to the world. Many Japanese are Buddhist, and they have very high standards of living and have a lot of inginuity, and provide a lot of produce to the West.

All in all, I think that Buddhists choose to live the way they do. It is not being lazy, it is searching for a spiritual truth. If you think that's laziness, then fine - I could ask you what you have ever contributed to society...

hmm one also has to think about those big corperate executives who spend all day plotting how to get you to hand over your money to them for something that costs the company 2 cents. Buddhists I must say do more good for society than most people, they could be killers or worse lawyers or bankers. When we look at all the people in the world and what they do, buddhists seem to do more by sitting and meditating than most do working all day. Besides what is society but a place where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, is it really such a good thing to contribute to it anyways?