16 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasOh I asked you about your ethics because I wanted too to know if the Buddhist ethics and yours overlap or not;
Ethics is a very complex thing to explain in such a forum as this. Sorry, cannot answer this question.
Break down the question, and I'll see if I can answer.
16 Sep 08
Originally posted by black beetleWell, in some extent, and in some extent not.
Oh I asked you about your ethics because I wanted too to know if the Buddhist ethics and yours overlap or not;
This may be taken as a non-answer, because it is a very difficult question.
Example: I like the anti-violence attitude of Dalai Lama, but this quality is not Buddhistic in general, there are fundamentalists and terrorists in Buddhism too.
16 Sep 08
Originally posted by PalynkaThe original post was if Buddhism is evil not if it was an ideology, it sounds like a putdown of Buddhism by a christian to me.
Your simple-mindedness never ceases to astound me. So you decided to start a rant about religion on a thread about Buddhism and now you say that Buddhism doesn't matter whether it is a religion or not.
Fascinating. I guess you were right. Your..."point"...was off-topic. The question on whether Buddhism can be consider an ideology, however, might not be.
16 Sep 08
Originally posted by sonhouseHi sonhouse!
The original post was if Buddhism is evil not if it was an ideology, it sounds like a putdown of Buddhism by a christian to me.
For starters, the core values of Buddhism are related solely with the comprehension of the nature of the indivindual. How can this be "evil" or "non evil"?
16 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by epiphinehasokay, point taken... though i hope you can appreciate i was trying to get some of the points across....
You interpretation of Buddhism may be somewhat oversimplified.
There are also the essential elements of Zen awakening and compassion. Direct experience of spiritual realities and the development of altruism are extremely valuable, not only for Buddhists, but for adherents of any other religious creed. It would be a mistake, therefore, to simply disr ism. To deny that wisdom its proper place would be tantamount to denying an aspect of oneself.
your take on buddism isn't strictly true either... as there is no one way to enlightenment, suffering is a suggestion (this is due to the budda believing it to be so) but not a necesseity...
i guess my point was there are many different roads to the same destination, and all are accepted... this does not conform to other religions, which imply there is only one way to god... ie.... christianity, through jesus
17 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasAs far as I know, non-violence is a core Buddhist principle. Have you got any stories about acts of terror committed by Buddhist fundamentalists?
Example: I like the anti-violence attitude of Dalai Lama, but this quality is not Buddhistic in general, there are fundamentalists and terrorists in Buddhism too.
17 Sep 08
Originally posted by FabianFnas"Aum is a composite belief system, which incorporated Asahara's own idiosyncratic interpretations of Yoga along with facets of Buddhism, Christianity and even the writings of Nostradamus."
Aum Shinrikyo movement in Tokyo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aum_Shinrikyo
A loony sect, not a school of Buddhism.
Next?
17 Sep 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Bosse de NageThe Sinhala in Sri Lanka?
"Aum is a composite belief system, which incorporated Asahara's own idiosyncratic interpretations of Yoga along with facets of Buddhism, Christianity and even the writings of Nostradamus."
A loony sect, not a school of Buddhism.
Next?
17 Sep 08
Originally posted by Bosse de NageStill, in his own mind, based on Buddhism.
"Aum is a composite belief system, which incorporated Asahara's own idiosyncratic interpretations of Yoga along with facets of Buddhism, Christianity and even the writings of Nostradamus."
A loony sect, not a school of Buddhism.
Next?
Yes a loony sect, which fundamentalist branch of any religion isn't?