Is Buddhism a Failure?

S.A.M. said:
Its an escapist philosophy. No one really wants to give up desire. Even the Dalai Lama has an entourage.
Click to expand...

Even bishops rape little boys. Even the prophet mohammad married a 12 year old.
By your criteria all religions fail. All ideologies fail.
 
Roman said:
Even bishops rape little boys. Even the prophet mohammad married a 12 year old.
By your criteria all religions fail. All ideologies fail.
Click to expand...

Except that the aim of Buddhism is to overcome desire. The aim of Christianity or Islam has nothing to do with sex or marriage. Its like being an atheist Jew.
 
SAM: Its not the aim of Buddhism to become the Buddha?

No. not anymore than the Chrisitan's aim is to be like Jesus. Emulating the Buddha's compassion is what is important but not giving up nor escaping life. If it were the goal most people in Buddhist countries would give up their lives for temple life and that is not the goal. Enlightenment is only for the few not the many. Notice below these are the basic principls for the disciple of Buddha's teaching, not what is expected of Buddhists who are living everyday life which is what it is indicated last on this list:

Buddha is our only Master.

We take refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha.

This world is not created and ruled by a God.

The purpose of life is to develop empathy for all living beings without prejudice and to work for their good,
happiness, and peace. Last but not the least; we need acquire acumen that will lead to the realization of

Ultimate Truth.

We accept the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism

All accustomed things (samskaara) are transient (anitya) and dukkha and all conditioned and unconditioned things (dharma) are without self (anaatma).

The Thirty-seven qualities helpful in Enlightenment are different aspects of the path taught by the Buddha.

There are three ways of attaining Enlightenment, namely as a Disciple, as a Pratyeka-Buddha and as a Samyak-sam-Buddha. The life of a Bodhisattva, who is striving to become a Samyak-sam-Buddha, is the highest, noblest and the most heroic.

The different Buddhist beliefs, practices, rites and ceremonies, customs and habits followed in different countries should not be confused with the essential teachings of Buddha.
 
All very noble I am sure. However, in every society where the Buddhist system was practised, it became a feudal state controlled by monks.

So its good that the Buddha is now a replacement for God, even for the atheist Buddhists.

Keeps them from being ripped off by feudal monks.
 
Signal said:
As far as I know, he immolated himself as a protest against the war, and this wasn't the only case of such a self-immolation.

As I mentioned in my first post in this thread, #100, Buddhism's philosophy is intricate, not always easy to understand or relate to. So I would say that monk's self-immolation was 'too intellectualized' a kind of protest for the majority of people to understand. His fellow monks and some of the practitioners certainly understand it and can relate to it. Perhaps his message was actually aimed at them, not the Western governments or the so-called masses.
Click to expand...

Its important to note that these self-immolations were denouned by the temples, it was denouned as not being in par with Buddha's preaching, rogue monks if you will.
 
S.A.M. said:
All very noble I am sure. However, in every society where the Buddhist system was practised, it became a feudal state controlled by monks.
Click to expand...

We have been through this before. Vietnam and Lao are not controlled by Monks and they are not feudal, Taiwan, China, Myanmar, Buhtan, Cambodia, Singapore, Thailand are not feudal nor are they controlled by Monks for you to continually assert this is a LIE, lying in the face of truth. If you personally dislike Buddhism or think its all bunk is a different story you'll find enough who say the same for your own religion but to lie about Buddhist countries to assert what is clearly untrue is rather silly don't you think?
 
Sure, because they no longer follow the Monk Bhikshu tradition, like the original Buddhists did.
 
S.A.M. said:
Sure, because they no longer follow the Monk Bhikshu tradition, like the original Buddhists did.
Click to expand...

Why are you asserting that all Buddhist countries are feudal when they are not? Are you backtracking or are you admitting to asserting something that isnt true?
 
I already stated that where the Budhhist tradition was followed, it devolved into a feudal state. The only surviving Buddhist societies as I already stated are the ones where Buddhism is no longer followed as preached.

In none of the surviving Buddhist societies today do Buddhists have the goal of individual liberation supported by the society.

Its quite a selfish goal in my view, since it requires the presence at all times of individuals who will support those who decide they want to attain individual liberation.
 
S.A.M. said:
I already stated that where the Budhhist tradition was followed, it devolved into a feudal state. The only surviving Buddhist societies as I already stated are the ones where Buddhism is no longer followed as preached.
Click to expand...

So now you assert that they are feudal again? You didn't show that Buddhist tradition devolves into feudalism you showed that Tibetan governmental structure was controlled by monks, even within Buddhism Tibetan Buddhism is unique, unique to their people and their State. You are stating that what was unique to Tibet was followed by all Buddhists when it was not, this is the reason why the Dalai Lama is only so for Tibetans and not all Buddhist world wide. If you want to find a reason to attack a religion or belief system at least choose something that is actually true or you will look like a liar or as being delibrately disrespectful because you find few here who honor your own religion. Buddhism survives in communitst as well as democratic nations.
 
As I have already stated, you can cross compare to all previous Buddhist Sangha systems. Whether it was in Burma, Japan, Sri Lanka, India, Nepal, the overwhelming fate of the bhikku system was exploitation of the masses, if not war among the monks themselves.

I don't have any problem with Buddhism as a belief system. As a social system, however, it is a complete failure.
 
S.A.M. said:
Its quite a selfish goal in my view, since it requires the presence at all times of individuals who will support those who decide they want to attain individual liberation.
Click to expand...

The mosques make their money how? Do you suppose its selfish that Jews support their synagogue? I mean really the monks bury the dead and play an important role in the life of many local citizens they do not think its wrong nor selfish to support the temples. Again you assume that Buddhists monks do nothing all day but sit in the protrate position in meditation and its not true. You take a western approach to Buddhism and place that way on
buddhist nations and it isn't the case. Like I said before you are terribly ignorant of what life is like in
buddhist countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top