Full Version: Some Buddhism criticism(from a former Buddhist)
I am not complaining i am just criticizing you.
"The divine souls come forth upon the earth to do the Will of their KAs..."
From the Egyptian Book of the Dead
From the Egyptian Book of the Dead
Siddharta Gautama is a historical figure. The codification and compilation of his teachings is also a historical fact. This result of this council is the Tripitaka.
To quote a religious history site:
"
After the Buddha's death, his disciple Mahakasyapa took over leadership of the Sangha. One of Mahakasyapa's first acts as the new Buddhist leader was to convene a council of 500 arhats to collect and preserve the Buddha's teachings.
The First Council, as it is known to Buddhist history, took place at Rajgir, the capital of the Magadha kingdom. The Buddha's most important disciples were asked to recite his teachings from memory.
"
Then there was the 2nd Buddhist Council. This council was convened to settle some disputes on the interpretations of Siddharta's teachings. This council led to the formation of the precursors of the Mahayana.
The Mahayana Sutras were generally accepted to be written by Buddhist monks that were against the conservatism of the early monks.
To quote a religious history site:
"
After the Buddha's death, his disciple Mahakasyapa took over leadership of the Sangha. One of Mahakasyapa's first acts as the new Buddhist leader was to convene a council of 500 arhats to collect and preserve the Buddha's teachings.
The First Council, as it is known to Buddhist history, took place at Rajgir, the capital of the Magadha kingdom. The Buddha's most important disciples were asked to recite his teachings from memory.
"
Then there was the 2nd Buddhist Council. This council was convened to settle some disputes on the interpretations of Siddharta's teachings. This council led to the formation of the precursors of the Mahayana.
The Mahayana Sutras were generally accepted to be written by Buddhist monks that were against the conservatism of the early monks.
QUOTE(atha @ Dec 14, 2007, 06:58 AM) 
For Rick...
Thank you, atha. I read the Scientific American article. Ten years of study to become an expert in something.
Rick, are You familiar with The Urusov Gambit ? By the way, there`s the latest book by Garry Kasparov, "How Life Imitates Chess"
QUOTE(atha @ Dec 18, 2007, 07:02 PM)
Rick, are You familiar with The Urusov Gambit ? By the way, there`s the latest book by Garry Kasparov, "How Life Imitates Chess"
I have seen the Urusov Gambit in study of openings but I don't think I've ever played it. It's very aggressive. I have been known to play the Bishop's Opening occasionally. Lately, I've been experimenting with the Nimzovitch Defense (1.e4 Nc6). If you can find a copy of Nimzovitch's My System, you should read it. It's quite interesting. Aaron Nimzovitch invented hypermodernism in chess.
Kasparov is a very interesting person. I haven't read his new book. I did follow his games against Deep Blue, both matches.
So you studied under what type of Buddhism? SGI right? You realize that that most all of Japanese Buddhism is based more off of Nichiren that Shakamuni. Most forms of Buddhism don't rely on "faith", master-disciple relationships, or dogmatism.
QUOTE(zhenka11230 @ Nov 18, 2007, 08:29 AM)
QUOTE(Rinzai Dharma @ Nov 17, 2007, 05:49 AM)
QUOTE(zhenka11230 @ Nov 16, 2007, 09:10 PM)
QUOTE(Flex @ Nov 16, 2007, 02:28 PM)
Is it just me, or didn't Siddhartha Gautama suggest that each much find his/her own path, and that there is no one path to enlightenment? Not to mention the eightfold path is just a guidline which is custom fit to the individuals, no different than the Golden Mean. It seems that anyone who claims to be a Buddhist to me, is not a true Buddhist, as they are not forging their own path but rather becoming indoctrinated.
Well at first it may seem to but again this type of thing is exactly what i mean. People make Buddhism into what they want to see but not what it actually is.
Maybe the problem is sometimes people use Buddhism as a cure, and sometimes it doesn't work, and this leads them to conclude that Buddhism is a farce. Stripped of all cultural trappings , verbal and linguistic complexity, in the final analysis , the ultimate goal of Buddhism is freedom-total and complete psychological freedom. I don't think there's anything wrong with that, especially if it gives you road maps and techniques to achieve it. Even the western philosophers with all their realizations and conclusions , theories and hypotheses , lumped together wouldn't match the accomplishments of the Buddha- for himself and for other people who used his teachings. The realizations of the westerns existentialists are second-hand, they did not experience freedom themselves. They don't know how. I don't think Nietzche, Kierkegaard and the rest of the gang attained this freedom during their lifetime. Their realizations reached their brains but not their hearts , their minds but not their souls. Maybe this is comparable to your experience. The Buddha as much as possible avoided speculations precisely to stop people from turning his teachings to an organized philosopy or religion. The Buddha's teaching is all about freedom and how to achieve it. All the rest are useless chatters and unnecessary additions that hardly do justice to the true psychological genius of all time - the Buddha.
I assume your knowledge of Buddhism is limited to the Myth of Buddha(his life) but you never actualy read the suttas because again you are making shit up on the go....
If you want to simplify what he taught to one sentence it would be "suffering and how to put a stop to it"
in all my years of studying Buddhism i never heard word "freedom" used even once. Except maybe for "freedom from reaction". His focus of thought was human suffering. Freedom is a existential concept that he does not deal with at all. Nietzsche and the rest were perfectly aware of Buddhism while writing their works btw... It puzzles me how people like you keep coming up with these I KNOW THE ESSENCE OF BUDDHISM AND THE REST GOT IT WRONG type of responses. In my time i read like billion of them. Some will say Buddhism is about detachment, some love, some activism, some rebellion, some freedom...
Your response equals to a statement such as Christianity is about loving your neighbor! Isnt it like .000001 percent of it? It is like picking one sentence out of the whole bible and completely ignore the rest 99.9%. You did the same with Buddhism and your essentialist approach.
Can I just say that I have had virtually the same path as you so I completely understand. First was xtianity, which is garbage, then I got seduced by Buddhism. Luckily I never got into it as deep as you, however. I have been to china and Thailand where the complete dogma of Buddhism in all its superstitious glory can be found and seen.
However I think that this is true of all religions, eventually the dogma becomes a trap. That is not to say that some of what Buddhism says is not true. It is these sayings that make Buddhism so alluring in the first place, there is definitely some logic in there. I think the key is always to take from it what makes sense to you and leave the rest.
My main query to you is this, why do you say that the enlightenment experience is a myth? What leads you to believe such things? Surely even the experiences referenced in this website http://brainmeta.com/index.php?p=expandconsciousness the experience of enhanced consciousness etc should be enough to at least perturb your mind direction in this way?brainmeta
Well i am specifically fighting the Buddhist notion of Enlightenment. There are probably a lot more definitions of enlightenment as there are of God. I just do not believe we can know everything about universe in a glimpse of realization but then again i admit i do not know but i saw no evidence of it being true - ever.
QUOTE(zhenka11230 @ Dec 20, 2007, 04:37 PM)
Well i am specifically fighting the Buddhist notion of Enlightenment. There are probably a lot more definitions of enlightenment as there are of God. I just do not believe we can know everything about universe in a glimpse of realization but then again i admit i do not know but i saw no evidence of it being true - ever.
Ah. So then do you acknowledge that Buddhism can bring about personal growth? Ok, I knew a man who was initially quite racist. He used his ignorant rage as a focal point to workout, train etc. When he was older and had grown past his racism, he rescued a black man who was being beaten by a few young whites.
Now was his initial thought process ignorant? yes. But one can achieve growth THROUGH ignorance. It gave him the strength to stop a number of people trying to hurt someone. Afterwards, he actually spoke to these guys and tried to make them be more compassionate. He got through (somewhat) because he came from a similar background. You've probably grown through these experiances regardless of the fact that they are "superstition."
QUOTE(Cassox @ Dec 20, 2007, 07:48 PM)
QUOTE(zhenka11230 @ Dec 20, 2007, 04:37 PM)
Well i am specifically fighting the Buddhist notion of Enlightenment. There are probably a lot more definitions of enlightenment as there are of God. I just do not believe we can know everything about universe in a glimpse of realization but then again i admit i do not know but i saw no evidence of it being true - ever.
Ah. So then do you acknowledge that Buddhism can bring about personal growth? Ok, I knew a man who was initially quite racist. He used his ignorant rage as a focal point to workout, train etc. When he was older and had grown past his racism, he rescued a black man who was being beaten by a few young whites.
Now was his initial thought process ignorant? yes. But one can achieve growth THROUGH ignorance. It gave him the strength to stop a number of people trying to hurt someone. Afterwards, he actually spoke to these guys and tried to make them be more compassionate. He got through (somewhat) because he came from a similar background. You've probably grown through these experiances regardless of the fact that they are "superstition."
How you deduced that from what i said puzzles me... And what it has to do with anything i said puzzles me even more.
lol.
What I'm trying to say is that while your not "saved" by Jesus, or "enlightened" by Buddha, you've probably gained something out of your seeking.
What I'm trying to say is that while your not "saved" by Jesus, or "enlightened" by Buddha, you've probably gained something out of your seeking.
QUOTE(Cassox @ Dec 20, 2007, 08:07 PM)
lol.
What I'm trying to say is that while your not "saved" by Jesus, or "enlightened" by Buddha, you've probably gained something out of your seeking.
That is defiantly true : )
Hi All,
I don't know if you guys still watching this topic. It seems already inactive for quite some time.
I'm a Buddhist from Indonesia. To all of you, especially zhenka11230, I would like to say that I'm here to help you understand Buddhism. But that if you still interested in. You may raise a question and we could discuss here. All of your confusion are due to lack of study and a little bit rush in practice (meditation). I wish we could talk in this forum.
Best wishes
Tony
I don't know if you guys still watching this topic. It seems already inactive for quite some time.
I'm a Buddhist from Indonesia. To all of you, especially zhenka11230, I would like to say that I'm here to help you understand Buddhism. But that if you still interested in. You may raise a question and we could discuss here. All of your confusion are due to lack of study and a little bit rush in practice (meditation). I wish we could talk in this forum.
Best wishes
Tony
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.