(March 14, 2010 at 12:22 am)Frank Wrote:(March 13, 2010 at 7:55 pm)Laurens Wrote: I think the problem with 'religious Buddhists' is that they see the Buddha as an infallable charicter who's every word should be taken as ultimate truth. I think the Buddha should be seen less as an infallable deity, and more of an example of a great human.
I admit I'm not extremely familiar with Buddhism (nor do I intend to become anymore familiar with it than I am right now), but I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Buddha never called himself a deity or infallible (and never advocated anyone else viewing him as such). I think there's different schools of thought in Buddhism (and the view you're referring to here is a later innovation). Maybe later followers thought they had to compete with Jesus or something ... who knows?
Yeah, I don't think the Buddha ever called himself such and didn't want anyone to make statues of him etc. However in Tibetan Buddhism (and possibly other forms) for example, they view the Buddha as omniscient - even going so far as to call him 'The Omniscient One'. In earlier forms of Buddhism, the Buddha is less of a deity, but he is still regarded as an infallable source of truth. These forms of Buddhism they often regard the texts as the main source of teaching (quoting them frequently on message boards!) and any departure from what the Buddha taught is largely frowned upon.
Whether or not the individual schools view the Buddha as human, they all place him beyond doubt and criticism.
