Thoughts on Buddhism

[Abracadabra]

Your "personal reasons" can be summed up with two words. Magical thinking. Whatever magical ideas you have, I can garauntee you sight unseen they have been handled, (and not even recently, but some time ago) by science, and empirical inquiry. That you cannot find this information has more to do with your desire to find it, than it's existence.

I can guarantee you that no one has "handled" my magical ideas yet. And if anyone could I would be more than thrilled to hear how they believe they have "handled" them.

You just don't understand where I'm coming from is all.

Think about this for moment,...

What is the foundational essence of Eastern Mysticism?

Well, in case you haven't already guess from its name I'll tell you. It's the realization that life is indeed a mystery and that we can never truly understand it intellectually at its most fundamental level.

So to become a mystic all that is required of you is that you have faith that life is a mystery that cannot be intellectually understood.

That should be easy. In fact, it shouldn't even require faith to believe that life is a mystery that can never be fully understood at its deepest level. That actually should be fairly obvious, (at least within the confines of mankind's current knowledge).

So how about a purely secular atheistic existence? Is it any less of a mystery that an entire universe could spring into existence and just accidentally happen to be made of stuff that evolves into beings that can actually become conscious and begin to try to describe what's going on around them.

Perhaps that's not a mystery to you. Perhaps in your way of thinking that seems perfectly "rational". Well, for me, a purely secular atheistic universe is every bit as big of a mystery as anything else. None of our current scientific knowledge has even remotely come close to suggesting why such a thing should exist.

Therefore secular atheism is itself a belief and acceptance of mysticism. It is no less weird than anything else. It's every bit as much of a mystery as mystical philosophies.

So neither has a leg-up on the other.

Yet you seem to be convinced that science has a leg-up on mysticism. That's where I disagree. Science hasn't actually explained anything other than what we observe going on around us. But that doesn't even begin to explain the mystery of existence or how anything ever came to be in the first place.

The idea that science could someday actually achieve that goal, is itself a faith-based belief that truly has not merit.

Like I've already pointed out, if you truly want to get scientific about it then just ask what the most successful theory in science has to say?

The most successful theory of science (i.e. Quantum Mechanics) says that we have reached a dead end that is impossible to penetrate.

That is what science actually has to say about this. Contrary to what you seem to be trying to claim.

[The Grand Nudger]

"Life is a mystery that cannot be known" is a platitude. It means nothing and can then later be reinterpreted to mean anything. Be more specific. Some mystery, that so many people know "the way"...hrugs: I like my mysteries to be more mysterious than the scribblings on wax paper in a fortune cookie.

Explanations? Oh, fantastic, your magical thoughts can provide us with explanations? Explanations for what, and please, do explain.

[Epimethean]

Holy cthonic bullshit smokers, Batman! These guys are loons.

[KichigaiNeko]

How did I miss this???

oh yeah, I still make my own honeymead. In fact I have 3 gallons of my best shit aged 3 years right now. 17% alcohol.

I'll be right over Jerry!! Mug in hand!!

[Bgood]

HEY, What about the ethical teachings of Buddha? Are these valid? And what about his methodical way of relieving suffering and maintaining personal happiness? These are pragmatic aspects of the dharma that are probably more important than any shaky concept of reincarnation. I just wonder what you 'wise guys' have to say about that! lol This is what I am talking about when I warn not to see the teachings too abstractly. This is a pitfall for many students. They focus on the 'fantastic' parts and overlook the more 'mundane' parts, which are really the foundation of a good life and attaining what buddhists call Nirvana.

Another point I need to stress about karma. Buddhism has it's own lingo, it's own verbiage. Karma is synonomous with cause and effect, or probability, or habit formation. It really is not a magical term. I don't think it is fair to dog Buddhism which has never done any real harm to people, unlike Christianity and all the Abrahamic religions which have a terrible, violent history of bloodshed and oppression. Buddhism is really a beautiful thing that I hope could spread in America. It would be such an awesome alternative to Christianity. I am not even a very devout buddhist. I just dabble with it and I can see the benefits and joy in it. After growing up Roman Catholic, searching for meaning in life with drugs and alcohol, etc., I found some peace of mind and coolness in the happy Buddha.

Peace and Love to all of you , I enjoy your intelligent wit and humor. I understand your plight. I am no better than any of you, no worse. I am just here now alone, listening to some music and thinking too much. If you see the Buddha along the road...kill him. Kill me.

---

One of my favorite bands of all time...Alice in Chains...any fans thereof?

[reverendjeremiah]

Holy cthonic bullshit smokers, Batman! These guys are loons.

No no no... Im sure they are going to present the kicker soon. The GRAND evidence.

... I think it may have something to do with magnets...

---

How did I miss this???

oh yeah, I still make my own honeymead. In fact I have 3 gallons of my best shit aged 3 years right now. 17% alcohol.

I'll be right over Jerry!! Mug in hand!!

I was wondering if anyone had their priorities straight?!?!

I like to mix it with a shot of apple juice, and maybe some cinnamin...sort of like a 34 proof honey apple pie. Very delicious. The women love it.

[Bgood]

Rev Jerry wrote

I like to mix it with a shot of apple juice, and maybe some cinnamin...sort of like a 34 proof honey apple pie. Very delicious. The women love it.

Damn that sounds good right now, quite the alchemic mixture of the sublime and the avaricious! You should market that kind of moonshine!

[reverendjeremiah]

Rev Jerry wrote

I like to mix it with a shot of apple juice, and maybe some cinnamin...sort of like a 34 proof honey apple pie. Very delicious. The women love it.

Damn that sounds good right now, quite the alchemic mixture of the sublime and the avaricious! You should market that kind of moonshine!

My father has been begging me to distill it and practically double the alcohol at around 60 proof. Its popular to distill honey mead in Africa and MAN it is strong the way they do it.

Im not sure if I want to up my system yet... its a big pain in the ass to distill after making the mead. Lots of work.

But the way it is now, I make that mix and then sometimes I put it in a crock pot to make it a warm cider. My wife loves it and gets shit faced.

[Abracadabra]

"Life is a mystery that cannot be known" is a platitude. It means nothing and can then later be reinterpreted to mean anything. Be more specific. Some mystery, that so many people know "the way"...hrugs: I like my mysteries to be more mysterious than the scribblings on wax paper in a fortune cookie.

Your reactions to my posts are highly paranoid on your part and have basically nothing to do with my position on anything.

You speak of things like "Some mystery, that so many people know "the way"...hrugs:"

Have I ever suggested that I know they way to anywhere? I'm absolutely certain that I haven't. Nor have I ever remotely suggested that you should personally believe in a spiritual essence to reality. Nor have I suggested that your purely secular view of the world is necessarily wrong. On the contrary I'm totally aware that life may very well be of a purely secular nature.

You are jumping to humongous conclusions in our conversations that can only be driven by paranoia associated with religious zealots who have indeed tried to convince you that they know "the way" to somewhere special whilst you don't.

But don't confuse me with such overzealous extremists. I'm not even remotely taking that position.

Explanations? Oh, fantastic, your magical thoughts can provide us with explanations? Explanations for what, and please, do explain.

Who are you addressing here?

Where did I ever say that I could explain anything using magical thoughts?

Where did that come from?

~~~~~

Let's get this straight Rhythm, you are the one who made the outlandish assertion that "In fact, magic does not exist".

I did not make the assertion that in fact it does. All I have addressed and suggested is that it hasn't been ruled out (contrary to your claim that it is supposedly a 'fact' that it does not exist)

Who's being unreasonable here?

For you to go around telling people that it is a 'fact' that magic does not exist, really isn't much different at all from a Christian zealot going around telling people that its a 'fact' that Jesus is the Son of God.

Neither of you can prove your absurd claims.

My only objection to you is that you are attempting to make out like as if it has someone been scientifically or logically well-established that magic cannot possibly exist.

That simply isn't true. It's blatantly false. It's basically a lie (i.e. an untruth)

For all scientists know the entire phenomena of life and the universe can indeed be nothing but a grand display of magic that no human even has the capability of comprehending.

For you to claim that it's a 'fact' that a magical reality has been "ruled out" and cannot possibly exist, is quite frankly hogwash.

The totality of our scientific knowledge of the world simply is in a position to make that sort of claim. You have become an atheistic extremist at the opposite end of the rainbow from religious fundamental zealots.

That's the only point that I'm trying to get across to you.

Extremism in either direction is just as ignorant.

My only position is that a magical reality or a spiritual reality is most certainly still well within the scope of a being plausible.

You are basically taking the stance that science has ruled out the possibility of a spiritual essence to reality altogether.

That's hogwash.

No such thing has been established by our scientific inquiry into the physical nature of the universe.

You're just flat out spreading false information, and making false claims about what has actually been established through science.

---

HEY, What about the ethical teachings of Buddha? Are these valid? And what about his methodical way of relieving suffering and maintaining personal happiness? These are pragmatic aspects of the dharma that are probably more important than any shaky concept of reincarnation. I just wonder what you 'wise guys' have to say about that! lol This is what I am talking about when I warn not to see the teachings too abstractly.

Well, I'd like to respond to this myself. As much as I admire the wisdom of the Buddhist teachings, the truth is that when it comes right down to it he doesn't truly teach anything that an intelligent secular atheistic psychologist shouldn't be able to figure out.

In short, there is no need to believe in anything mystical to grasp the concepts taught by Buddha. You certainly don't need to believe in reincarnation, for example. And if you need to believe in some sort of life after death, to avoid "pain and suffering" that could only be because the thought of dying itself is causing your distress.

So there's really no need to even think in terms of spirituality in order to benefit from the teachings of Buddha, and like I say, a secular psychologist should be able to come up with similar advice, and they probably already have.

[Angrboda]

It looks like a funny thing happened on the way to the forum...


Regarding Zen Buddhism and Taoism being alike, not in my experience. Yes Taoism influenced the evolution of Buddhism in east Asia and vice versa, but to suggest the two are similar is imo outlandish. (and regards the OP about whether Buddhism is all sugar and spice, I don't have a quote handy, but there are plenty of examples of Chinese Buddhists talking trash about Taoists in the literature; there was no love lost there.)

As noted, Buddhism is a large umbrella including interpretations which are hardly compatible under the same word. I'm also told by a former Buddhist living in Korea that it's easy to misunderstand the beliefs if you rely upon English translation of technical terms like dukkha. I come upon this all the time with people attempting to understand the notions of emptiness and the middle path based on what the English words suggest to them.

That preface out of the way, a book I'm reading (Doubt: A History by Jennifer M. Hecht) suggests that the Buddha's original teachings were largely agnostic on the questions of reincarnation and karma, and that these notions were incorporated as Buddhism evolved out of the background of Hindu culture in the Indus Valley. (I've also recently been clued to the possibility that the evolution of Buddhism at the time was also strongly influenced by political realities of the time, but haven't followed up.) Indeed, there are even Buddhisms that lack the metaphysical component.

I have a few loose wires in my brain, the result of which, sometimes, religion takes on a dire importance for a few weeks and then goes back to normal. Thus, I've flirted with Buddhism, and during these episodes, I've even converted to Buddhism, so I know a little, but not a lot. To my mind, Buddhism simply doesn't make any sense without the metaphysical doctrines of karma and reincarnation. And I can't believe such things. (My recent reading also inclines me to believe there are more fundamental disagreements between myself and the Buddha.)

Beyond that, there is the question as to whether Buddhist psychologies and practices are useful in and of themselves, independent of the metaphysics, as a sort of technology. I found studying The Transmission Of The Lamp very useful, and have used Buddhist concepts to understand puzzles in my Taoism, but that may simply be the nature of the two systems, compatible, if not necessarily true. Apparently there are Buddhists who would answer in the affirmative, but I suspect they are the Buddhist equivalent of Deists and Agnostics, needing to distance themselves from the primary beliefs but unable to completely let go.

Anyway, enough rambling.