Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Where do the buddhists go?
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 46 of 69 (297465)
03-22-2006 11:27 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by rgb
03-22-2006 4:30 AM


Re: who are you responding to?
As for Buddhism, yes, there is a heaven and, yes, there is a hell.
Can you steer us to a link or some source regarding this?

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 Z Y BUZ SAW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by rgb, posted 03-22-2006 4:30 AM rgb has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 47 of 69 (297467)
03-22-2006 11:34 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by arachnophilia
03-22-2006 12:54 AM


.
Thanks for looking these up, Arach. Our dispute seems to be more about what hell is or isn't. Perhaps that would require a new thread. I don't have time to get up an opener on one now, but maybe after I get my some bookwork caught up and taxes done. I do all that for my business myself rather than hire it out.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 Z Y BUZ SAW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by arachnophilia, posted 03-22-2006 12:54 AM arachnophilia has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 48 of 69 (297472)
03-22-2006 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Buzsaw
03-22-2006 11:19 PM


Existing energy.
Energy doesn't go to nirvana; souls go to nirvana.
For that matter, energy doesn't go to your eternal heaven, either. I still don't see what "energy" has to do with either place and your response doesn't really make it any clearer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Buzsaw, posted 03-22-2006 11:19 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Buzsaw, posted 03-24-2006 12:03 AM crashfrog has replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 49 of 69 (297643)
03-23-2006 5:43 PM


Buddist believe in reincarnation. They believe that your karma dictates whether you return into the wheel of life to correct or undo the bad karma you made in this life. You can not choose what form you will be reborn as. The ultimate goal is to not be reborn, to escape the wheel of life. So the question: Where do buddist go? does not apply. In order to go somewhere on must have a place in which to go. To achieve enlightenment, to cease all suffering and to not exist is the ultimate goal as far as I understand it. I am not of that religion but have read some books about it. Buddism is more of a way of life than a religion, it does not offer any answers but rather poses questions. It is one of the most honest religions I have ever come across in that it makes no attempt in stating it is the one and only truth. All it states is that everything is in flux, everything changes, and everything is just as it should be. The natural condition of being is suffering, In order to stop suffering one must cease disire. To cease to exist is Nirvana. **or I could be wrong.

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1504 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 50 of 69 (297645)
03-23-2006 5:49 PM


A buddist tale
A little girl is washing dishes with her grandmother. The girls is washing a bowl that has been in the family for centuries. It slips from her hands and breaks on the floor....The grand mother without batting a eye gets the broom and dust pan and sweeps the broken shards into the trash, and smiles to her mortified grandchild and says..."It was already broken." If you understand this you understand the buddist way of thinking.

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by DeclinetoState, posted 03-24-2006 1:25 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 69 (297690)
03-24-2006 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by crashfrog
03-22-2006 11:47 PM


Anything that exists except space and time have energy. I'm going on my personal viewpoint that particles are not a property of space but something existing in space.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 Z Y BUZ SAW

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by crashfrog, posted 03-22-2006 11:47 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by crashfrog, posted 03-24-2006 12:15 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 52 of 69 (297694)
03-24-2006 12:15 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Buzsaw
03-24-2006 12:03 AM


You've got some weird ideas, Buz. Anybody ever tell you that?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Buzsaw, posted 03-24-2006 12:03 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
DeclinetoState
Member (Idle past 6437 days)
Posts: 158
Joined: 01-16-2006


Message 53 of 69 (297807)
03-24-2006 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by 1.61803
03-23-2006 5:49 PM


Re: A buddist tale
A little girl is washing dishes with her grandmother. The girls is washing a bowl that has been in the family for centuries. It slips from her hands and breaks on the floor....The grand mother without batting a eye gets the broom and dust pan and sweeps the broken shards into the trash, and smiles to her mortified grandchild and says..."It was already broken." If you understand this you understand the buddist way of thinking.
Isn't that kind of like the blonde who gets a phone call early in the morning and, when asked by the caller if he woke her up, says, "It's ok, I had to answer the phone anyway"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by 1.61803, posted 03-23-2006 5:49 PM 1.61803 has not replied

  
Dubious Drewski
Member (Idle past 2530 days)
Posts: 73
From: Alberta
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 54 of 69 (304807)
04-17-2006 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by rgb
03-22-2006 4:30 AM


Re: who are you responding to?
quote:
It is just a natural state of your being. Same thing with ascending to heaven or descending to hell. If you are enlightened then you naturally ascend to heaven. If you are bogged down by, say, greed, lust, or some other worldly desire then you naturally descend to hell.
There is no judging involved.
I really find that type of thinking logical and appealing. That is, if you are saying what I think you are: "Heaven" and "Hell" are what you make of your life. I have to admit, Buddhism has some very respectable and logical views on life. If it weren't for the dualist aspects, such as spirits and reincarnation, I would be a Buddhist in a heartbeat.
[edit]
Here's an insight into my motivation:
As some of you who have been reading my posts might know, I am an Ex-Fundie who is looking for a secular "religion" to call my own. I want nothing more than to belong to a group of similarily-minded folks who would rather follow Aristotle's Golden Means or Rule-Utilitarianism than some limited, arbitrary and out-of-date commandments written in an ancient text.
Really, my goal here at EvC is to sort things out and hopefully come to something of a logical "spritual" conclusion, if there is such a thing.
Has anybody here taken a similar journey?
This message has been edited by Drewsky, 04-17-2006 04:51 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by rgb, posted 03-22-2006 4:30 AM rgb has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by lfen, posted 04-17-2006 11:44 PM Dubious Drewski has not replied
 Message 56 by iano, posted 04-18-2006 6:55 AM Dubious Drewski has replied
 Message 60 by Shh, posted 06-01-2006 9:09 PM Dubious Drewski has replied

  
lfen
Member (Idle past 4677 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 55 of 69 (304859)
04-17-2006 11:44 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Dubious Drewski
04-17-2006 4:39 PM


Re: who are you responding to?
If it weren't for the dualist aspects, such as spirits and reincarnation, I would be a Buddhist in a heartbeat.
I'm unclear about your reference to "dualist" aspects. There are popular versions of Buddhism especially Tibetan that include these things.
I think of Buddhism as a top down religion which provides a popular religion for those who need it but is always open to going beyond those forms.
The Buddha experienced a fundamental change in his consciousness. This change is something that is available and has been experienced not only by Buddhists, but also Hindu's, Muslims, and Christians among others. This change can be characterized as nondual. It is the disappearance of the sense of subject relating to objects.
Bernadette Roberts' book The Experience of No Self is a very good introduction to this as she writes as a contemporary American. Her background was years spent as a contemplative nun before leaving to be a mother and householder. She remains Christian but did state that when she read some accounts of things the Buddha said she recognized at last some one else who had experienced what she had.
Wayne Liquorman's book The Acceptance of What Is is also a good contemporary American account of the Hindu advaita (non dual) teachings.
Googling on those two names would get you a little on them to start. Both of their books are in my local library so you should be able to find them or get them through an intra library loan.
Bear in mind that no one is enlightened. An individual can be said to awaken but that awakening is to the realization that there are no separate individual beings. This is one teaching of the Buddha:
In reality there is no such thing as an I who liberates, and no other who is liberated. If a Bodhisattva holds on to the idea that a self, person, living being, or life span exists, that person is not a true Bodhisattva!"
http://www.spiritual-happiness.com/nlpupdate3.html
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Dubious Drewski, posted 04-17-2006 4:39 PM Dubious Drewski has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 56 of 69 (304905)
04-18-2006 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Dubious Drewski
04-17-2006 4:39 PM


Seeking and finding
I am an Ex-Fundie who is looking for a secular "religion" to call my own. I want nothing more than to belong to a group of similarily-minded folks who would rather follow Aristotle's Golden Means or Rule-Utilitarianism than some limited, arbitrary and out-of-date commandments written in an ancient text.
Why not start your own religion? That way you can have all the elements you find attractive, noble and worthwhile whilst excluding any element you find unattractive. If its about what you want then this is the optimal route.
If on the other hand you would prefer to seek the truth then it becomes less a matter of what you would like and more a matter of it is the way it is. In that case I heartily recommend investigating Christianity. It doesn't 'require' following any commandments new or old and in that sense is very refreshing (although what one might consider old fashioned about not stealing and murdering is beyond me )
You say your an ex-Fundi. I presume this was Fundimental Christianity (whatever that is). If so, you might be of the opinion that you have already tried Christianity. However this Christians understanding is that God is the one who makes a person a Christian and that that action, once carried out - is irreversible. It follows that one cannot, per that definition, be an ex-Christian

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Dubious Drewski, posted 04-17-2006 4:39 PM Dubious Drewski has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Dubious Drewski, posted 04-18-2006 9:36 AM iano has replied

  
Dubious Drewski
Member (Idle past 2530 days)
Posts: 73
From: Alberta
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 57 of 69 (304929)
04-18-2006 9:36 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by iano
04-18-2006 6:55 AM


Re: Seeking and finding
quote:
Why not start your own religion?
but...
quote:
If on the other hand you would prefer to seek the truth then it becomes less a matter of what you would like and more a matter of it is the way it is.
Yes, exactly. Keep in mind though, I am using the term "religion" very loosely. I am searching for a group of inherently practical, logical and humane people. I have actually tried joining the INTP mailing list. It turned out to be the closest thing I have found to what I am looking for. Odd, huh?
I was raised Christian, yes. In terms of what a Christian is, I don't believe I have any of those qualities anymore. I do, in fact believe the commandments (while still respectable) are not nearly as practical or comprehensive as the works of moral philosophers. (What does the bible have to say about human cloning? Philosophy covers it.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by iano, posted 04-18-2006 6:55 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by iano, posted 04-18-2006 10:08 AM Dubious Drewski has replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 58 of 69 (304937)
04-18-2006 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Dubious Drewski
04-18-2006 9:36 AM


Re: Seeking and finding
I am searching for a group of inherently practical, logical and humane people.
Aren't we all? For myself it was a search for a system which wouldn't just answer some questions I had but all the questions I had in a fully coherent way. I never found completeness in the philosophies. For instance, there is much talk of objective morals on this site and it seems to me that without something external to ourselves to provide them then subjective they must ultimately remain.
Which clashed with my just knowing there were objective morals. That there was objective morality was as inescapable as the fact of my own existance. Doubt one, doubt the other - which would have been bugger all use to me.
I was raised Christian, yes. In terms of what a Christian is, I don't believe I have any of those qualities anymore. I do, in fact believe the commandments (while still respectable) are not nearly as practical or comprehensive as the works of moral philosophers. (What does the bible have to say about human cloning? Philosophy covers it.)
Elsewhere there is a thread running called "Can children have faith?" It must certainly encompass the idea that children are taught/indoctrinated into Christianity as they are many other things. Suffice to say that Christianity is not an learned set of beliefs. Christianity is at its most...er...fundemental level, a positional state in which God takes a person out of one position and puts them in another. Whilst one can don the mantle of the characteristics of what a Christian is exhorted to become, post-positional-change-of-state, this has no bearing on their actual position. If God has done this then one is a Christian, if not then one isn't nor ever has been.
Been there/done that/got the T-shirt cannot apply. If not then one cannot know whether it is practical or comprehensive. Outside looking in problems abound.
The purpose of the commandments/law is not primarily that we follow/adhere to them. They were given in the first instance to simply show us that we cannot follow them. In that role they excel were we to take even a short hard look at ourselves. They shouldn't be supposed to function as what they aren't (on the outside side of Christianity)
If followed to the letter the we would have heaven on earth. In that sense, whilst comprehensive, they are totally impractical. So we have to fudge and provide phlexible-philosophies that take account of our ever shifting perception of reality. Philosophy: the ever-moveable feast.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Dubious Drewski, posted 04-18-2006 9:36 AM Dubious Drewski has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Dubious Drewski, posted 04-19-2006 11:36 AM iano has not replied

  
Dubious Drewski
Member (Idle past 2530 days)
Posts: 73
From: Alberta
Joined: 02-04-2006


Message 59 of 69 (305231)
04-19-2006 11:36 AM
Reply to: Message 58 by iano
04-18-2006 10:08 AM


Re: Seeking and finding
quote:
I never found completeness in the philosophies.
I apologize, but what that simply tells me is that you haven't yet read some philosopher's works. Even with my layman knowledge of the area, I can assure you that philosophy covers nearly every aspect of our world from nearly every perspective (Even theologist's perspectives). That's been it's purpose for thousands of years.
quote:
In that sense, whilst comprehensive, they are totally impractical. So we have to fudge and provide phlexible-philosophies that take account of our ever shifting perception of reality. Philosophy: the ever-moveable feast.
This is similar to the the reasoning sometimes used to discredit science. That is: "It's always changing, therefore it's never right".
Let me explain my view of science and philosphy. Imagine the progression of human knowledge as a minivan heading to ... DisneyLand. Now imagine a passenger in this minivan making comments such as "We're constantly moving. I don't see how we'll achieve anything like this. At home, we were sure of things. Why didn't we stay there?". I would be a different passenger, saying things like: "Yes, we're on an unkown road, taking corners and going through new territory, but through this all, I can see that we're headed somewhere that's better than where we started. Sure, we're on new ground every second, but every inch we cover is a refinement over our last location, bringing us closer to our goal" (This goal is ultimate truth, naturally)
Yes, philosophy and science are changing. But you would be more accurate to say they are refining.
quote:
Christianity is at its most...er...fundemental level, a positional state in which God takes a person out of one position and puts them in another.
But you must understand, in order for points such as these to affect me, I must first believe there is indeed a deity guiding my life. While the thought is beautiful and comforting, I have no reason to believe this other than the fact that it's a beautiful and comforting thought. I become more sure of this as I grow older.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by iano, posted 04-18-2006 10:08 AM iano has not replied

  
Shh
Inactive Member


Message 60 of 69 (316931)
06-01-2006 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Dubious Drewski
04-17-2006 4:39 PM


You're looking for Taoism
Hi Drewsky, just was reading thru' and saw this
If it weren't for the dualist aspects, such as spirits and reincarnation, I would be a Buddhist in a heartbeat.
Buddhism, in my opinion is a kind of blending of Taoism and another religion (Hinduism I think).
Some of Budhism doesn't make sense to me, and not in the traditional one-hand-clapping kind of way.
For example, the cause of all suffering is the Ego, which is basicly the enemy.
Enlightenment is the destruction of the Ego.
This precludes hell because at any point a person can destroy their Ego, and become immune to it.
Spirits, Ghosts and Gods are all acceptable, and yet individual existence is deemed impossible which, when you think about it destroys any compatability with Christianity, yet you will surely hear Christians claim to have Buddhist beliefs.
The destruction of the Ego, requires the rejection of material wealth, yet you will no doubt hear of millionaires who claim Buddhist beliefs.
Buddhism, has been reinterpreted (often fashionably) so many times that it's very difficult for a westerner to follow.
Taoism is similar to Buddhism in many ways, but harsher. It isn't really a religion it's a discipline.
To a Taoist reincarnation is an obvious every day occurence, but dead is dead. This seems like a paradox, but when asked for evidence of reincarnation they will point out that all life feeds on other life. Dead matter "reincarnated", but dead is still dead, and there's no way to argue with the logic.
This kind of logic, which at first looks like nonsense, is the basis for Taoism. There's no comfort attached to enlightenment here, other than the ability to cope with reality, in a meaningful way.
If you're interested pm me and I can probably get you some decent sources, but since I'm not too confident of my own understanding here, you could try googling LaoTze, who's kind of the Taoist Buddha

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Dubious Drewski, posted 04-17-2006 4:39 PM Dubious Drewski has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Dubious Drewski, posted 11-08-2006 12:58 AM Shh has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024