Is Buddhism a Failure?

[DiamondHearts]

swarm, I'm still waiting for the proof that any of my posts can be used to prove your allegation that I am a 'terrorist.' I take it as a personal insult which is the result of hatred and xenophobia. I have categorically condemned all violence against civilians, whomever they may be.

Michael, your fake parables are simply ridiculous. If you expect us to believe the fact that you say all these racist things about Arabs and Muslims, and also cherish an alleged destruction of Muslims by "China and India" in the future, how can we possibly classify you as anything else but a racist and someone who promotes violence against Muslims and Arabs.

Your posts are merely a mangle of racist epithets against Arabs in specific, and Muslims in general. I await the moderators to take proper action regarding these posts. If you had ascribed these things to Jews, you would be banned by now.

 

[Michael]

So you are a mind reader? and of the dead?

The stories in the Qur'an are clearly copied from a Bible. IMO, a mad-man would have just made up his own myths and I think this goes to intent.

hence IMO I have deduced Mohammad was a liar.

I have also deduce that although he married a 9 year old (supposedly) he was not a pedophile as he did not surround himself with children to have sex with. he was just acting as was typical of his culture at that time.

I try to call a spade a spade when I see a spade.

Which the Buddha did not get? People did not hang on his word and treat him like a leader?

As I understand it, he was a wealthy prince that gave up his wealth and instead lived a meager life. As a King he would have been a leader without question. As a Philosopher he dared to be judged on his ideas.

He seems to fit the archetype philosopher, but, maybe not?

 

[Michael]

DiamondHearts,

unlike you I know that race is an illusion and does not exist.

What you call "Arab" I call "Islamic" and yes, there are many many things I abhor about that particular brand of monotheism. It seems to bring out the worst in humankind.

so, again, you are muddled in you brain as to what is real and what is not real.


As for China, I have many friends in Iran, I don't want to see their families harmed. It'd be nice if they could peacefully join the rest of civilization. But that doens't take away from the possibility that China may, over time, be converted to evangelical Xiantiy, its certainly happens many other places, it's the most contagious theistic meme invented by humanity and if such should have, then DH, you'll soon see your own intolerance up close and personal. When you bow low before Chinese-Jesus just try to remember what I said here ... because I really really do want you to hear some sort of incarnation of my voice saying "I told you so".

I never claimed to be perfect and so yes, I find something rather satisfactory of the twists of irony and fate if such should occur .... I'm sure Joseph Campbell could tell us why we feel such

 

[S.A.M.]

As I understand it, he was a wealthy prince that gave up his wealth and instead lived a meager life

Was there a Buddha?

It is possible that the founder of Buddhism may have come from a tribe of Sakyas, though the pretended history of that race is certainly quite fictitious. It is possible that he may have come of a royal line, that he may have been born in a city called Kapilavastu, though this name arouses grave suspicions, opening the door to either mythological or allegorical interpretations, and the existence of such a town is very feebly certified. The name Gotama is certainly historic and well-known, but it is a borrowed name which tells us little. Much trouble has been taken to explain how this strictly Brahmanic patronymic might have passed to a family of Kshatriyas [the warrior caste] . Apart from Buddha, it is above all closely associated with his supposed aunt, the legendary Prajápati......I do not speak of his genealogy: it has certainly no value, being borrowed whole from epic heroes, in particular from Rama. On the other hand, it may well be that the teacher of the Buddhists entered on his religious career at the age of thirty-nine

 

[Michael]

Was there a Socrates?

If not, then, whomever made up the Buddha protagonist, are they, like Plato, really the Buddha?

 

[S.A.M.]

And that is relevant because it points further to the weakness of your argument?

 

[Michael]

And that is relevant because it points further to the weakness of your argument?

Someone somewhere came up with some Buddhist ideas, that person or people were philosophers. Someone somewhere came up with Islam, that person or people were liars because there is no god.

simple really

 

[werzil]

Buddha, the Sikh traditions and the social pressures of "retired" men, to abandon materialism and seek ascetic way of life, leads to more personal style of religious/spiritual belief in traditions of subcontinent.

Aryan races at first warrior clan, then religious privilege, then caste system dividing all people into warrior, priest, worker, etc. This was when guru traditions began. This is recorded in Mahabaratha and Upanishads, which comment on development of invasive Aryan societal pressures on lowland Indus, Punjab delta regions.

Such that, long-held tradition of leader or Saht Guru who knows the true way, and has spent many hours finding true path of ascetic, not wanting or desiring material things or wealth. After life of privilege and plenty, abandon everything, wife, palace, family, all possessions, and find true nature.

Either this was because wealthy, privileged men want to do some useful thing. Or because nothing more useful for old men than go and live in cave.

 

[Gustav]

MOD NOTE:
This thread was created from 31 off topic posts in the Shia/Sunni thread. I was going to just delete them, but it seemed a reasonable discussion was going on so I created this new thread should any of the posters wish to pursue this topic.

a complete and utter failure
what the fuck is this thread about?

you created it?
sam did?

whats up with the islam shit?
off topic ja?
split?

wtf is going on?

 

[wise acre]

The stories in the Qur'an are clearly copied from a Bible. IMO, a mad-man would have just made up his own myths and I think this goes to intent.

hence IMO I have deduced Mohammad was a liar.

1) this assumes that the stories in the OT are all false 2) that Mohammend could not have had experiences that were based in part on stories in his environment and honestly integrated them in his religious experiences.

Your deduction is weak and still qualifies as mind reading. You are ascribing motives to someone you have never even met, despite the trickiness of doing this with people one knows well.

I try to call a spade a spade when I see a spade.

You mean you make up motives to suit your position.

As I understand it, he was a wealthy prince that gave up his wealth and instead lived a meager life. As a King he would have been a leader without question. As a Philosopher he dared to be judged on his ideas.

Notice: more mind reading. He could have felt it was hollow being worshipped for his money or position and needed his ego stroked for ideas he originated. Perhaps his Dad only respected people who were smart or rebels.
Note: I am just pointing out possibilities and that your speculation, more mind reading, is mere speculation, even though earlier you presented it as simply the case.

He seems to fit the archetype philosopher, but, maybe not?

There we go, uncertainty.

 

[S.A.M.]

Buddha, the Sikh traditions and the social pressures of "retired" men, to abandon materialism and seek ascetic way of life, leads to more personal style of religious/spiritual belief in traditions of subcontinent.

Aryan races at first warrior clan, then religious privilege, then caste system dividing all people into warrior, priest, worker, etc. This was when guru traditions began. This is recorded in Mahabaratha and Upanishads, which comment on development of invasive Aryan societal pressures on lowland Indus, Punjab delta regions.

Such that, long-held tradition of leader or Saht Guru who knows the true way, and has spent many hours finding true path of ascetic, not wanting or desiring material things or wealth. After life of privilege and plenty, abandon everything, wife, palace, family, all possessions, and find true nature.

Either this was because wealthy, privileged men want to do some useful thing. Or because nothing more useful for old men than go and live in cave.

Thats an interesting way to look at it. Do you think the concept of Buddha abandoning his family and material goods is based on Varnashram?

After completing the life of a student, let a man become a householder.
After completing the life of a householder, let him become a forest dweller,
let him renounce all things. Or he may renounce all things directly from the student state
or from the householder's state, as well as from that of the forest dweller.

Sukla Yajur Veda, Jabala Upanishad 4.

 

[Michael]

wise acre,

If the stories are the same as in the Bible then there are only one logical conclusion:

1) it was copied

That much is simple.

We know that the stories were copied. Do we agree?
(this is assuming yes there are no FSM or Xenus, Allahs, Pixies, or dogs-that-ate-my-homeworks)

Second, was Mohammad mad or sane? If he was sane and copied, then he was a sane liar who presented his copied stories as if they were revelations from Allah. Agreed?

If he was mad and coped, then he was a mad liar who presented his copied stories as if they were revelations from Allah.

If you'd like to give a mad-man a pass then please do make the case.

 

[spidergoat]

Buddhism will always be a failure. There is nothing you can depend on for spiritual enlightenment, not any religion and not yourself. There is nothing you can do. A waste of energy. For some reason, Buddha's recommendations can help lead to this realization(the realization that the search for enlightenment, or the search to connect with God- is futile), I think because it helps clear your head, to live simply, to eat fewer calories of a nourishing type, to avoid intoxicants, not get angry, etc., all the while exercising your thinking skills. At best, the mythology is a clever ruse. It is a trick, but a trick for the victim's benefit.

Buddhism doesn't teach anything, it only removes certain false assumptions. These were restrictive mental constructions that come about from being raised in a culture, which helps form the mind at an early stage. The only benefit, which has no practical purpose, is an enormous feeling of freedom, an expansive merging of the mind (which is also the body) and the moment (which is the sensory world). In this aspect, Buddhism is one of the most hedonistic religions in the world! Being ascetic in order to more fully enjoy the world of the senses is like working out in order to more fully enjoy an orgy.

 

[S.A.M.]

There is nothing you can depend on for spiritual enlightenment, not any religion and not yourself. There is nothing you can do. A waste of energy. For some reason, Buddha's recommendations can help lead to this realization(the realization that the search for enlightenment, or the search to connect with God- is futile), I think because it helps clear your head, to live simply, to eat fewer calories of a nourishing type, to avoid intoxicants, not get angry, etc., all the while exercising your thinking skills. At best, the mythology is a clever ruse. It is a trick, but a trick for the victim's benefit.

So why doesn't it work? Why don't practising Buddhists learn any of this? Why do they still support [for example] tribal relationships, killing people as collateral damages and war for land?

 

[DiamondHearts]

I still can't understand how racism is allowed on these forums. The moderators act as if it is acceptable. Also, preaching and relishing the destruction of a people should be banned here.

You may think that it is acceptable here, but remember that in the end anyone who preaches violence and hatred will be judged by God. How sad will be those people on the Last Day. They thought they were the winners, but ended up being the losers.

 

[S.A.M.]

Its not racism so much as frustration.

 

[Gustav]

is your flesh as willing as the spirit?
is that, a normative condition?

 

[wise acre]

wise acre,

If the stories are the same as in the Bible then there are only one logical conclusion:

1) it was copied

Gee, no. He could be sane, honest and influenced by the cultures in his area. For example.

We know that the stories were copied. Do we agree?

Nope.

(this is assuming yes there are no FSM or Xenus, Allahs, Pixies, or dogs-that-ate-my-homeworks)

Yes, I noticed you were assuming that. I am glad you do. Once you make assumptions some deductive lines become easier. Sort of like magic.

Second, was Mohammad mad or sane? If he was sane and copied, then he was a sane liar who presented his copied stories as if they were revelations from Allah. Agreed?

Well, no. See above.

Also, have you admitted anywhere before this post that you were incorrect when you said he must be a liar?

It is clear you have shifted your position and it's always honest to admit when one make mistakes that are pointed out to you.

If he was mad and coped, then he was a mad liar who presented his copied stories as if they were revelations from Allah.

Op cit.

If you'd like to give a mad-man a pass then please do make the case.

OP cit.

My posts were not about Mohammed. I am not islamic. My posts have been about your poor logic.

 

[S.A.M.]

is your flesh as willing as the spirit?
is that, a normative condition?

The spirit is usually willing, the flesh is weak

 

[Tyler]

I still can't understand how racism is allowed on these forums. The moderators act as if it is acceptable. Also, preaching and relishing the destruction of a people should be banned here.

You may think that it is acceptable here, but remember that in the end anyone who preaches violence and hatred will be judged by God. How sad will be those people on the Last Day. They thought they were the winners, but ended up being the losers.

Don't the Hebrew, Christian Bibles and Qu'ran all preach hatred against sin? And under some interpretations - especially the Hebrew bible in my knowledge - preach hatred against so-called sinners? Haven't you expressed hatred of American policy and actions? Haven't you supported violence in response?

I'm not suggesting your hatred or support of violent response to violence is illogical or unfounded. I'm just saying that it's kind of like "God will judge poorly those who hate... except if they hate the things that God also hates." It's circular and intellectually brain-dead.

Moreover, criticizing Islam is not racist at all. Last I check Islam is not a race. Nor would criticizing the Hebrew or Christian bibles be racist. Nor is Sam criticizing Buddhism racist. None of these are races. They are philosophies/religions/texts, and as such ought to be fair game to any and all criticism.

Muslim... polygamist ... obese ... slave-owning .. intolerant ... cow-eyed imbeciles .. fat ... plagiarist ... liar ... Monkey ... etc

I'm not sure where Michael gets "obese" or "cow-eyed" from... or "monkey" for that matter... but I'm also not sure why you consider these terms to be racist. Polygamist is not a racist term. Obese, fat, cow-eyed and monkey may all be stupid insults, but they are not racist. Plagiarist, liar and slave-owning may not be the most intellectual of critiques, but they are nonetheless critiques, and not racist commentary. Intolerant is simply a matter of truth. Any group which claims "mine is the divine and the sacred, and the only one which possess truth and the way, and all others are lesser, or even outright evil" is intolerant. This is exactly as true for Islam as it is for Christianity, Judaism or many other religions. You, as a firm believer, may stand and say it is a justified intolerance; it is a recognition of God's intolerance of those who deny or reject him. That's fine. It's still an intolerance.

Though, to be fair, I have a feeling that if such comments were made with equal intent to offend towards jews they might well have been deleted by now. I'm prone to agree with you on that point. I just think that the proper answer is to let both go by rather than to delete both.

To paraphrase: I don't agree with what Michael said, but I would defend his right to say it.