What do I stand to get from Buddhism?

[yrreg]

Back to "What do I stand to get from Buddhism?"

That's what I notice to the again commendation of the powers that be here, they are not throwing warning at me for 'derailing' the topic of this thread, "What do I stand to get from Buddhism?"

In forums where Buddhists exercise a good influence, I can notice that where others don't get any warning for committing murders and performing mayhems in the way they attack fellow members and in their uncivil language, I so much as leak some sour colonic gas get slapped with a warning or a deletion (and that without notice of deletion) or even a suspension; and where others can go far and wide from the topic, I so much as bring in some collateral matter is blasted right away for derailing. And all because I talk in criticism of Buddhism.


Back then to "What do I stand to get from Buddhism?"

My main contention and the only one in my critique of Buddhism is that everything that the Buddhists here who are hitchhiking Buddhists -- because they don't take in the whole and essential package of Buddhism, like most importantly and of core composition, karma, rebirth, and Nirvana, everything they praise Buddhism to the sky for is already available in Western wisdom thinking and writing, without having to get it from someone like Gautama who claims and has been proclaimed by his followers to have arrived at enlightenment by meditation.

That is my primary contention, and also secondarily the intrinsic hollowness of Buddhist beliefs and practices when you remove from Buddhism those ideas and observances common to the rest of non-Buddhist mankind -- desire leads to suffering, right thought, speech, etc, learned from the lessons of survival, society, civilization, and culture, and without meditation, by just living life in everyday situations and learning from it.

That is why I always tell Buddhist converts from the West that they are either being naive or faddish or both naive and faddish, so that they are either faddishly naive or naively faddish. They are not being ingenious but ingenuous in their ravings on how cool or how hot Buddhism is to them since they discover Buddhism, and in their psychology worshiped Gautama as their idol God even though they deny him divinity in their epistemology -- very ingenuous.

It's all their syndrome of greener pasture elsewhere.


Smile here, everyone.

Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm

 

[nescafe]

So far so good, I have not been thrown out by the powers here in JREF. I have been testing the limit of their non-Buddhistic impartiality, and so far that limit has not been reached by me, which is a great tribute to the powers here.

okay...

You see, sometimes the Buddhists among the powers that be in a forum dedicated to free inquiry, free thought, and free speech cannot prevail on the non-Buddhist ones to throw out someone who makes it a forum career to criticize Gautama, Buddhism, and Buddhists.

That persecution complex seems to be coming along nicely.

But owing to complaints from Buddhist members of the forum, eventually they, the non-Buddhist owners, admins, and mods, have to give in to the insistence of their fellow admins and mods who are Buddhists and from the complaints of Buddhist members of the forum, because they notice that login statistics are declining with every complaint against the career critic of Buddhism and things Buddhist.

damn -- you are on to my conspiracy!

So far, the owner/admins/mods have not succumbed to the complaints of Buddhist members here and have not been influenced by declining statistics of login numbers, hail to them.

Not for long. The Vast Buddhist Conspiracy is about to strike! Darat, Lisa, and company won't know what hit 'em!

But the time will come, specially if they set great store on the donations of Buddhist members to operate their forum, then and with me not heeding warnings, I would be thrown out of this JREF Forum -- i.e., again: unless the JREF does not depend on contributions from members for existence and operation, and also they are not swayed by declining statistics owing to Buddhist members complaining against fellow members who criticize Buddhism relentlessly but on sound grounds.

.... yes, because the economic might of the Buddhist cabal is such that we can crush a forum that refuses to comply with our demands like an overripe orange! Muahahaha!

In brief, I will be around as long as the JREF Forum is around provided the non-Buddhist owner/admins/mods of the forum are not influenced by numerical popularity and not either on loss of donations; because they can do without numerical popularity and without donations from members, owing to because they have this policy of sticking come hell and high water to the ideals of free inquiry, free thought, and free speech.

Seriously. You are getting a wee bit paranoid. Seek professional help.

--
Global Buddhist Hegemony, Member # 5829163
Ask me about our world domination scheme!

 

[prewitt81]

I apologize for troll feeding. I had read some of yrreg's posts in the past and thought he was meaning to be taken seriously. The conspiracy garbage makes me think he's either having a laugh or is showing signs of mental instability.

 

[Ryokan]

Not for long. The Vast Buddhist Conspiracy is about to strike! Darat, Lisa, and company won't know what hit 'em!

Lisa will. She's one of us.

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Neat. I don't think I've ever seen a Buddhist persecution complex before.

 

[Ryokan]

I apologize for troll feeding. I had read some of yrreg's posts in the past and thought he was meaning to be taken seriously. The conspiracy garbage makes me think he's either having a laugh or is showing signs of mental instability.

Search for his acupunture threads in the science section, where he claims he's a super-sceptic because he disregards evidence and only looks at anecdotal evidence, all the while refusing to reply to people because they don't format their posts the right way.

He sees Buddhist conspiracies everywhere. He got thrown out of the Internet Infidels forum for some reason, and that is of course because they're all closet Buddhists. There's also this thread where he makes demands to Randi and calls him a closet Buddhist.

There's no doubt in my mind, Yrreg is a troll.

 

[yrreg]

Shoddy and dishonest scholarship.

And for those that don't know Yrreg well, here's an interesting thread: Yrreg argues that Christianity is the most intelligent religion.

Dear Ryokan:

I find your scholarship here most deplorable, for being a Buddhist trained to be right in thought and speech, you do just the same engage in partial and misleading representation of people who do criticize your fanatical or fundamentalist attachment to Buddhism, just to look as saying something true and objective.

You choose not to pay attention to the title of the thread of mine in the IIDB you bring up here to give just the appearance of even only partial truth, but by intention to mislead and misrepresent and thereby to fool the readers of this forum. Take notice of the question mark at the end of the title line of that thread of min in the IIDB; here, look below.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=103865

Here below, reproduced in Ascii:

November 1, 2004, 05:09 AM #1935422 / #1
pachomius2000
Banned

Join Date: June 2003
Location: Somewhere in time
Posts: 1,220

[Title of thread:] Christianity, the most intelligent religion?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Among world religions with a history stretching for at least a thousand years, which is the most intelligent one?

If we consider achievements as in number of Nobel Prize winners, Olympic gold medals awardees, in advances of science and technology, in military prowess, economic muscles, arts, literature, the media and entertainment, the conclusion seems obvious.

And the winner is Christianity.

Then we can also ask which is the most unintelligent religion.

What do you guys here say?

Please express your views in laboratory language and mood.

Pachomius2000

The saddest thing to happen to an academic for which I had given you the credit of being one, is to resort to shoddy and dishonest scholarship instead of critical meticulosity in representing the writings of other academics.

Tell me, if you still remember how Western academics of which Buddhists are not and never will be, for having already closeted their minds to accept someone like Gautama as being an enlightened agent, who never did anything of serious investigation except navel gazing into the fuzzy recesses of his cranium by meditation.

Tell me, namely, do you remember what the phrases: amicus curiae and advocatus diaboli mean?

Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm

 

[Ryokan]

Among world religions with a history stretching for at least a thousand years, which is the most intelligent one?

If we consider achievements as in number of Nobel Prize winners, Olympic gold medals awardees, in advances of science and technology, in military prowess, economic muscles, arts, literature, the media and entertainment, the conclusion seems obvious.

And the winner is Christianity.

This isn't claiming that Christianity is the most intelligent religion?

You can add as many question marks in your thread name as you won't, but when you yourself concludes that Christianity is the most intelligent religion, the cat is out of the bag.

Anyway, I read the entire thread, not just the thread title and the opening post. You argue pretty strongly for Christianity being the most intelligent religion. Anyone who reads the thread will see that.

Don't run away from your own words, Yrreg.

Tell me, namely, do you remember what the phrases: amicus curiae and advocatus diaboli mean?

Remember? I have no idea what those terms mean. Although I would guess the latter one means playing devil's advocate.

Are you now claiming that in your discussion on Christianity as the most intelligent religion you're playing devil's advocate? I'm sorry, I don't believe you.

 

[Dancing David]

Not posted by Yrreg

So far so good, I have not been thrown out by the powers here in JREF. I have been testing the limit of their non-Bigfootic impartiality, and so far that limit has not been reached by me, which is a great tribute to the powers here.

You see, sometimes the Bigfoots among the powers that be in a forum dedicated to free inquiry, free thought, and free speech cannot prevail on the non-Bigfoot ones to throw out someone who makes it a forum career to criticize Hairy Bigfoot, Bigfootism, and Bigfoots.

But owing to complaints from Bigfoot members of the forum, eventually they, the non-Bigfoot owners, admins, and mods, have to give in to the insistence of their fellow admins and mods who are Bigfoots and from the complaints of Bigfoot members of the forum, because they notice that login statistics are declining with every complaint against the career critic of Bigfootism and things Bigfoot.

So far, the owner/admins/mods have not succumbed to the complaints of Bigfoot members here and have not been influenced by declining statistics of login numbers, hail to them.

But the time will come, specially if they set great store on the donations of Bigfoot members to operate their forum, then and with me not heeding warnings, I would be thrown out of this JREF Forum -- i.e., again: unless the JREF does not depend on contributions from members for existence and operation, and also they are not swayed by declining statistics owing to Bigfoot members complaining against fellow members who criticize Bigfootism relentlessly but on sound grounds.

In brief, I will be around as long as the JREF Forum is around provided the non-Bigfoot owner/admins/mods of the forum are not influenced by numerical popularity and not either on loss of donations; because they can do without numerical popularity and without donations from members, owing to because they have this policy of sticking come hell and high water to the ideals of free inquiry, free thought, and free speech.

So, and again: all hail to the [non-Bigfoot] owner/admins/mods of the JREF Forum.

That really makes the paranoid delusions stand out.

Yreeg, you are such a newbie to the forum, and you are such a bigot.

We would all decry the mods roundly and soundly if they banned you, if you did more than just read the tripe you wrote and looked into the history of bannings at the JREF you would know that even the most deplorable troll recieve tons of support for not being banned.

It is too bad that you paranoia prevents you from seeing the truth, that i know of no one has complained about your posts.
You haven't broken any rules. But your reality is a little cracked.

 

[yrreg]

Breaking news, new thread: "Buddhism, the most intelligent religion?"

Remember? I have no idea what those terms mean. Although I would guess the latter one means playing devil's advocate.

Everyone here, smile, okay?


To be fair to Buddhism I will start a new thread after doing research on the intelligence factor in Buddhism in the history of mankind, "Buddhism, the most intelligent religion?"

Yrreg: Tell me, if you still remember how Western academics of which Buddhists are not and never will be, for having already closeted their minds to accept someone like Gautama as being an enlightened agent, who never did anything of serious investigation except navel gazing into the fuzzy recesses of his cranium by meditation.

Tell me, namely, do you remember what the phrases: amicus curiae and advocatus diaboli mean?


Ryokan: Remember? I have no idea what those terms mean. Although I would guess the latter one means playing devil's advocate.
​

You have no idea...

Dear Ryokan, that is what I am trying very hard to tell you, that you should expand your academic grasp, find out then about what is an Amicus curiae;" you owe it to yourself for the broadening of your academic culture, instead of as I told Dancing David, obsessing your mind with the incestuous breeding of obsolete fallacies from Gautama whose historical existence can very well be seriously doubted today.

---------------------------------------

Tell me honestly now, are you the Buddhist admin or mod in this here JREF Forum? and please no tergiversations.

Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm

 

[yrreg]

Buddhist calamitous fallacy adopted by CaptainManacles for a life philosophy.

Buddhism makes a few arguments that I find compelling, all pretty much deriving from the idea "nothing will last forever."

[See the full text of this anti-life message at the very bottom of the present post.]​

I am sorry for you that in believing from the authority of the Gautama that nothing will last forever you have decided to depreciate and downplay life and everything that is life. That is most tragic and catastrophic for your wife and kids, you trying to live your best and act your best in pursuit of that mentality nothing lasts forever.

Why bother to keep healthy and live long: you, your wife, and your kids, also your parents; why buy and maintain a home, why keep your car running smoothly and safely, why at all work for a living?

True to the belief that life is nothing lasting forever, you should retire, you and your wife and your kids, to the sangha and beg every morning for a living -- instead of honest, honorable, livelihood work to keep oneself and one's family alive, well provided, and comfortable.

Isn't that what is advocated by the Gautama on harping that nothing lasts forever, life is not worth living, seek burial in the sangha where people live with the degree even before physical demise of R.I.P.

That is very intelligent of the philosophy and religion founded by Gautama?

You tell me that's not what you mean; well, then say it like it really is for mankind and all life forms, this way -- as Yrreg would put it:

We must live and seek to live well and as long and even longer and better everyday and for every life being born everyday, for nothing so far for mankind and life in general lasts forever. -- Yrreg​

That is the most fallacious and disastrous error ever visited by one man, Gautama, on human history, the insistence on the negative side of every question, and a pessimistic attitude toward it, instead of accepting it as a challenge to change it and overcome it even, like for example the research to extend life and one day make its duration indefinite, or to restore it to a person should he one day die the death of biological disintegration.

What will James Randi who loves and lives life to the fullest and wants to stay alive forever tell you?

Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm

========================================

[Full text of this lugubrious funereal dirge from CaptainManacles]
​

Buddhism makes a few arguments that I find compelling, all pretty much deriving from the idea "nothing will last forever."

An idea that I think few people would disagree with, but that a lot of people don't contemplate the full weight of. The implications of this often don't really hit people until they lose a loved one, and the pain of the loss is made worse by the realization that they'd been living as if the person was going to live forever, even though in the back of your mind you knew that they would not. Buddhists think this is something that you should keep in the foreground of your thoughts, being one of the most catastrophic errors of judgment that people can make.

Similarly, happiness will not last forever. If you try to accumulate enough stuff, enough relationships, a good enough job, a hot enough wife, that you will be happy forever, you will be disappointed. You will probably also end up cheating on your wife, becoming obsessed with your job, being a sociopath and greedy. Everyone is well aware that drug's huge highs and then huge lows had a tendency to result in addiction, but everything in life has highs and lows in lesser degrees, and can result in similarly painful addiction for the same reasons. You can be addicted to pornography, sex, eating, not eating, "non-addictive" drugs, football, and it can cause similar troubles in your life.

But, if you think that giving up these things will make you happy forever, if you ditch your friends, become celibate, quit your job, become homeless, you will simply become cold, lonely, and hungry, possibly dying, and that's lame. There's a happy middle ground.

It also asks the age old philosophical question of "who am I?" What is the self? It answers this in a rather skeptic manner, in that the soul is a delusion, that what constitutes what you see as "self" is just an accumulation of matter and energy, what creates "self" is the same thing that makes up everything else in the world, the "self" is a collection of thoughts, memories, and desires that has come to the delusion that it is not just a collection of thoughts, memories, and desires. It asserts that this delusion is similarly a source of much unnecessary pain.

It also takes the idea of "impermanence" one step further then most people probably would think of in their day to day lives. Though we may realize the fact of impermanence in broad generalizations about our loved ones and so on, Buddhism takes it a step further in saying that delusion grips us every second of every day, and drenches the reasoning behind every action. Combined with the materialist idea of self, it concludes that we do in a very real and practical way die every second of every day.

It makes me think of the philosophical kohan (excuse the pun) of the star-trek type teleporter. A man sues the creator of the teleporter he used, because he claims the teleporter murdered him, and then reconstructed a clone of him elsewhere. The general conclusion being that it is not the physical body that matters, but the mind. However, the mind always changes. You can argue that there is a continuity to the mind which is important, but even the continuity is directed along different paths throughout your life, everything that makes you changes: your memories, thoughts, values.

Buddhism also hold an idea that what we lump together as "emotions" can be precepts, states, and ways of behaving. Some of which you have control of, and some of which you don't. If you ignore or repress your feelings, you're just missing out on a piece of information that could tell you more about your life. If you think you can't control your emotions, you may act like a jerk when you don't really need to.

It also offers up a few ways to help combat those particular delusions. The first and most important step being to just realize that these things are delusions. However, sometimes when you know things intellectually, it can be still hard to understand them practically, which is why it is important to always keep the idea in mind when you are going about your day, and try to be very very aware of why you make decisions and what is going on around you. It takes practice.

The second simplest thing to do is just to notice when you are being greedy, sociopathic, cheating on your wife, ect. First and foremost just stop doing it, then try to figure out why you did and where the error in your reasoning was. Notice when you are being destructive in your life and then try to figure out why. This requires being very aware of your thoughts, feelings, and actions. It takes practice.

Be honest with people as much as possible. Realize that the things you say can be as good of an indicator of what's going on "behind the curtain" so to speak, as your actions.

Moderation. Things are good, but not endless pointless consumption, especially with mind altering substances. There are dozens of reasons why you need to be aware of what you are doing, thinking, and what's going on around you, and why your reasoning needs to stay sharp. Mind altering substances get in the way of all of that, so even more then everything else, limit consumption of it, and there's something to be said for avoiding it all together.

If your job mostly sucks, your life will mostly suck. If your job is mostly good, your life will mostly be good. Also, if the business you work for or run collectively falls under the above delusions, you will suffer collectively.

It bears repeating. It takes practice. You should see better and better results with time, but it will never be perfect, and like all things, there will be slumps.

It bears repeating. Be aware of what you are doing, thinking, feeling, saying, where you are working.

It can help to sit down every now again and just think about stuff, especially being mindful of your delusions. The mind is spread out most of the time, it can help to just sit and do nothing. Also, like most new skills, it can help to start out with something easier. You can practice being very very aware of your thoughts, actions, speech by sitting and focusing on one thing like your thoughts, or one action like your breathing, or just an object in your room. Slowly you'll become better at being aware in your day to day life.

That's the run of it. I agree with most of those things to varying degrees. Some of it is kinda obvious stuff that everyone in this day and age knows. Some of it is stuff you learn more and more as you get older. Some of it is debatably just incorrect, but there it is. That's what Buddhism offers.

 

[CaptainManacles]

See the full text of this anti-life message at the very bottom of the present post.

Anti-life message? What are you, the ghost of Ayn Rand?

I am sorry for you that in believing from the authority of the Gautama that nothing will last forever

I am sorry that you are such a biggotted and hateful person that you have to make things up about people.

you have decided to depreciate and downplay life and everything that is life.

When did I ever downplay life?

That is most tragic and catastrophic for your wife and kids, you trying to live your best and act your best in pursuit of that mentality nothing lasts forever.

Are you out of your mind? I'm sorry your wife and kids have to live with someone who is seriously mentally ill.

Why bother to keep healthy and live long: you, your wife, and your kids, also your parents; why buy and maintain a home, why keep your car running smoothly and safely, why at all work for a living?

Because I enjoy those things for now. Why do you think that recognizing that my health will fail and my car will break down is a bad thing? How does your wife and kids feel about living with someone who, living in a delusion, never takes time to appreciate them? How does it feel to have someone make up wild unsubstantiated claims about you?

True to the belief that life is nothing lasting forever

I neither said that life is nothing or that it lasts forever. I think I said the exact opposite of that.

you should retire, you and your wife and your kids, to the sangha and beg every morning for a living

I don't even know what that is. But given your belief that everything lasts forever, maybe you, your wife and kids should take a jump off a high bridge for the thrill.

Isn't that what is advocated by the Gautama on harping that nothing lasts forever

No? I wouldn't even know. I said I find some buddhist ideas compelling. That doesn't even mean that I agree with them, smart guy.

life is not worth living

No.

seek burial in the sangha where people live with the degree even before physical demise of R.I.P.

No.

That is very intelligent of the philosophy and religion founded by Gautama?

No, it's a stupid philosophy made up by a biggot.

You tell me that's not what you mean; well, then say it like it really is for mankind and all life forms, this way -- as Yrreg would put it:

You really are playing solitare with a card missing, aren't you?

What will James Randi who loves and lives life to the fullest and wants to stay alive forever tell you?

I don't know, I haven't asked him. I don't presume to know what people think and their opinions unless I ask them.

 

[Dancing David]

I am sorry for you that in believing from the authority of the Gautama that nothing will last forever you have decided to depreciate and downplay life and everything that is life. That is most tragic and catastrophic for your wife and kids, you trying to live your best and act your best in pursuit of that mentality nothing lasts forever.

the buddha taught that the ideas were to be examined criticaly, if they agreed with the decision of the viwer then they are to be accepted, so no authority. People are free to follow thier paths as they see fit.

Yopur conclusions seem to be based upon different thinking. Some feel that by aknowledging the temporary nature of all things there is then the idea that each moment should be appreciated as it is.

Why bother to keep healthy and live long: you, your wife, and your kids, also your parents; why buy and maintain a home, why keep your car running smoothly and safely, why at all work for a living?

Because they decrease suffering, the temporary nature of things does not mean they can't be enjoyed,by the way can you enjoy a real flower as much as a silk one?

True to the belief that life is nothing lasting forever, you should retire, you and your wife and your kids, to the sangha and beg every morning for a living -- instead of honest, honorable, livelihood work to keep oneself and one's family alive, well provided, and comfortable.

That is your advice, not the advice of the buddha, again, unlike some ignorant people I could mention, the buddha made all of his followers voluntary, lay people make take what refuge they wish in the sangha.

I think some begging by the clergy creates a sense of dependance and humility, if the catholic priest had to beg for thier supper they might be better off, same for the evalgelicals.

Isn't that what is advocated by the Gautama on harping that nothing lasts forever, life is not worth living, seek burial in the sangha where people live with the degree even before physical demise of R.I.P.

I don't recall him teaching that, the life of the sanha is voluntary, followers may chose to live in the sangha and take the vows or not as they chose.
The buddha taught that people could follow him and still live ordinary lives.

That is very intelligent of the philosophy and religion founded by Gautama?

Not really but if that is what the teachings of the buddha say to you then please by all means feel free to criticse and not follow them.

You tell me that's not what you mean; well, then say it like it really is for mankind and all life forms, this way -- as Yrreg would put it:

We must live and seek to live well and as long and even longer and better everyday and for every life being born everyday, for nothing so far for mankind and life in general lasts forever. -- Yrreg​

i don't think anyone would disagree with that. that would be partly in accord with the dharma.

That is the most fallacious and disastrous error ever visited by one man, Gautama, on human history, the insistence on the negative side of every question, and a pessimistic attitude toward it, instead of accepting it as a challenge to change it and overcome it even, like for example the research to extend life and one day make its duration indefinite, or to restore it to a person should he one day die the death of biological disintegration.

Ignorance is bliss, if that is your perception of the teachings of the buddha then so be it.
There are negative parts of life and positive parts of life, all things are impermanant. They seem to be that way.
So what isn't imperamanent Yrreg?

What will James Randi who loves and lives life to the fullest and wants to stay alive forever tell you?

Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm

========================================

 

[Ryokan]

So what isn't imperamanent Yrreg?

Yes, Yrreg, please answer.

 

[yrreg]

Personal questionings allowed here, okay then let's go.

Originally Posted by Dancing David
So what isn't imperamanent Yrreg?

Yes, Yrreg, please answer.

So far as I know from astrophysicists of the big bang school the material universe is not impermanent, it is permanent, only it will get wound down as energy is used up.

Wait, I will look up the big bang theory and come back to you.

http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/universe/b_bang.html

The Big Bang Theory

Representation of the universe according to inflationary cosmology.
The Big Bang Theory is the dominant scientific theory about the origin of the universe. According to the big bang, the universe was created sometime between 10 billion and 20 billion years ago from a cosmic explosion that hurled matter and in all directions.

[imgl]http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/universe/BANG.GIF[/imgl]
In 1927, the Belgian priest Georges Lemaître was the first to propose that the universe began with the explosion of a primeval atom. His proposal came after observing the red shift in distant nebulas by astronomers to a model of the universe based on relativity. Years later, Edwin Hubble found experimental evidence to help justify Lemaître's theory. He found that distant galaxies in every direction are going away from us with speeds proportional to their distance.

The big bang was initially suggested because it explains why distant galaxies are traveling away from us at great speeds. The theory also predicts the existence of cosmic background radiation (the glow left over from the explosion itself). The Big Bang Theory received its strongest confirmation when this radiation was discovered in 1964 by Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson, who later won the Nobel Prize for this discovery.

Although the Big Bang Theory is widely accepted, it probably will never be proved; consequentially, leaving a number of tough, unanswered questions.

Updated December 2, 1997. Contacts

http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101010625/story.html

But that's not the end, according to University of Michigan astrophysicist Fred Adams. An expert on the fate of the cosmos and co-author with Greg Laughlin of The Five Ages of the Universe (Touchstone Books; 2000), Adams predicts that all this dead matter will eventually collapse into black holes. By the time the universe is 1 trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion years old, the black holes themselves will disintegrate into stray particles, which will bind loosely to form individual "atoms" larger than the size of today's universe. Eventually, even these will decay, leaving a featureless, infinitely large void. And that will be that—unless, of course, whatever inconceivable event that launched the original Big Bang should recur, and the ultimate free lunch is served once more.

What I know and is still valid is that matter cannot be created nor destroyed, but it can get tired. However, I subject myself to corrections from the learned astrophysicists of this here JREF Forum.


Now, where does Buddhism with karma, rebirth, Nirvana, and anatta come in here?


Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm

 

[yrreg]

One question in two alternative queries from me to you two.

Tell me most honestly, without tergiversations and reservations:

Are you two gentlemen, Ryokan and Dancing David, converts to your peculiar kinds of Buddhism from:​

(a) contacts with Buddhists who influenced you into accepting Buddhism, or

(b) accidentally having come across and read the text of the Pali Canon?​

I want to undertake a theory with you two if you will be honest with me and with yourselves.

Questioning people about their inner self-knowledge is what got me thrown out from the Internet Infidels Discussion Board; besides, the Buddhist guys there don't feel they want to share with me their inner self-knowledge -- most probably they don't have any self-knowledge that is why they give me the impression of always dodging and hiding -- from themselves thereby from me.

The IIDB is a most ambiguously guided board from the part of the admins and mods running it. On the one hand, they have such enlightened policies as calling anyone a troll is a serious violation of inter civil regard among members; if you call anyone a troll it will be edited out or on your being stubborn you will be eliminated.

On the other hand they have a conspicuous sympathy with Buddhists and some are even Buddhists, because being atheists they think that they should side with Buddhists who also give the impression that they advocate atheism -- they don't know that Gautama is a polytheist in real life if he ever did exist.

Then they keep boasting about being a board for free inquiry, free thought, and free speech, but when you ask members about their honest intimate self dispositions inside themselves, the admins and mods will bear down hard on you; because they want all discussions to be sterile-ly impersonal -- for which I told them time and again and also members interacting with me on Buddhism, that in matters of religion this is tantamount to talking about food or sex but never exchanging each other's personal knowledge and experience of food or sex.


Hope this here JREF Forum does not have such a knowledge-inhibiting policy

Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm

 

[Ryokan]

So far as I know from astrophysicists of the big bang school the material universe is not impermanent, it is permanent, only it will get wound down as energy is used up.

So the universe is permanent, but nothing else?

Now, where does Buddhism with karma, rebirth, Nirvana, and anatta come in here?

Karma, rebirth, nirvana and anatta doesn't have anything to do with this, the four noble truths do.

A Buddhist realises that nothing is permanent (besides the universe, Gautama Buddha didn't know much about modern astrophysics), and then strives not to feel attached to these things - thereby learning to enjoy things more and live in the moment. Live each day as if they were your last, so to speak.

Tell me most honestly, without tergiversations and reservations:

Are you two gentlemen, Ryokan and Dancing David, converts to your peculiar kinds of Buddhism from:

(a) contacts with Buddhists who influenced you into accepting Buddhism, or

No, I've never talked to another Buddhist before, except a friend of mine from Burma who I met just a year ago through the Red Cross.

(b) accidentally having come across and read the text of the Pali Canon?

The short answer would be yes. Note that the Pali Canon is the Theravada Canon and that Dancing David is not a Theravada Buddhist. Neither of the questions may apply to him.

On the other hand they have a conspicuous sympathy with Buddhists and some are even Buddhists, because being atheists they think that they should side with Buddhists who also give the impression that they advocate atheism -- they don't know that Gautama is a polytheist in real life if he ever did exist.

Oh, I was so sure I was an atheist. How am I not?

Evidence that Gautama was a polytheist?

Oh, why do I bother giving serious replies to Yrreg?

ETA:

By the way, the reason for you being banned from the Internet Infidels forum is, according to them, that you refused to follow the rules of the forum.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=3664369#post3664369

 

[Dancing David]

So far as I know from astrophysicists of the big bang school the material universe is not impermanent, it is permanent, only it will get wound down as energy is used up.

The universe is comprised of changing elements and compositions. It had a 'begining' and it might have an end. But since it is in a constant state of flux, where is the permanent?

Wait, I will look up the big bang theory and come back to you.

What I know and is still valid is that matter cannot be created nor destroyed, but it can get tired. However, I subject myself to corrections from the learned astrophysicists of this here JREF Forum.

Matter can be converted to enery and combined or fractioned, if it is not an elementary particle. they can be abosrbed if they are energy and reradiated.
In fact there are even crazy little particles which exist in pairs of opposites for a brief while and then anihilate each other.
Where is the permanent part?

Now, where does Buddhism with karma, rebirth, Nirvana, and anatta come in here?

Uh, karma is the consequence of actions, nibbanna is a state of psychology and there is no soul or permenent self.
Impermanence is visible evrywhere we see and look.
Even a single atom of matter is constantly changing. Unless it is at absoloute zero, and becomes Bose-Eistien Condensate.
But as soon as it 'warms' up it starts changing again.

Where is the something that is unchanging?

Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm

Where is the something unchanging?

 

[yrreg]

You set too much store on my being banned in IIDB... hahaha.

By the way, the reason for you being banned from the Internet Infidels forum is, according to them, that you refused to follow the rules of the forum.

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?p=3664369#post3664369

Dear Ryokan:

I wish we could proceed to the exchange of ideas, in most particular to my theory about what people stand to get from Buddhism, instead of your setting so much store in my being banned from the IIDB -- I bring the matter up, in my case, to show how the JREF Forum is most commendably different from the IIDB; in your case it is to indulge in your vindictive and retaliatory hunger, I fear.

You see, I had a teacher in grade school who told my parents in the Parents Teachers Association that as far as he is concerned he takes every child on the basis of his performance in his (teacher's) subjects and in his behavior with him, and not bothering with his (child's)previous records elsewhere whatever.

If you were a teacher, then I feel sorry for children who have to be in your subjects and also for their parents, but most specially for you yourself, because you are such a vindictive and retaliatory character though being a Buddhist vowed almost to compassion, etc.

Here is something from Confucius for practical everyday living instead of Buddha's drive to self-extinction in Nirvana:

Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves. -- Confucius (551-478 BCE) ​

Just so that you will learn the skill of critical reading.., have you noticed that the reason for my banning in the IIDB is phrased so very broadly, thus* (read again the link you bring up from the IIDB):

[banned user] pachomius2000 -- for failure to follow the forum rules after agreeing to do so.​

Just to enjoy further this activity of writing which is my hobby and pleasure.., study now the respective specific reasons why others are banned, in the same link you brought up, here below -- always for an exact particular violation:

spiritualpower -- for being Troy Brooks sockpuppet number nine.

supersport -- for failing to agree to the conditions of an Official Administrator Notice demanding that he curb his overly disruptive behaviour.

n00bie2006 -- for spamming.

pachomius2000 -- for failure to follow the forum rules after agreeing to do so.

Friendly Guy and Me! -- reincarnations of a banned user

TruthTeller9595 -- for spamming.

Insane in the lane -- has been banned for spam-soliciting via the PM system.

YourWorstNightmare -- has been banned for stupidly giving away the fact he's previously banned user supersport's sockpuppet in his very first post.

IRON MAN -- has been banned due to a combination of moderator harassment and a long trend of insults towards other users.

Tami Wren -- has been banned per her not-so-polite request.

Naminori42 -- for spamming.

Hoosier Brother -- for spamming via PMs.

rapturelover -- for spamming

erslyman -- for spamming.

johannine -- for disruptive posting and failure to respond to an Official Administrator Notice.

Phil-Islam -- for rules violations and subsequently failing to respond to mod PM and OAN.

laser -- for being another damn spammer.

dattaswami1 -- for spamming the board with copy/pasted sermons

rostau -- for failure to follow the Forum rules

vfr -- for failure to respond satisfactorily to an OAN.

Kesmai -- for spamming.

usadiscuss0759 -- for spamming Maverick

Kallodragon -- for spamming the board.

Daniel Laberge -- for spamming

*I was able to access the link you brought up, but after saving it in text format I could no longer retrieve the webpage, the server returned unerringly the notice that "You have been banned, duration for lifting, never," something like that, very vindictive and retaliatory. But think about the broad multifaceted ground for my banning, hmmmm very interesting: "pachomius2000 -- for failure to follow the forum rules after agreeing to do so (i.e., in the initial agreement for registration). Forum rules...? all and each and every one of them forum rules, hahaha.

If you are an experienced observer in such matters where people are expelled from a group on very broad and multifaceted grounds, it is because the powers inside could not find any particular ground to justify the use of their power to expel, so they just to satisfy their vinditive and retaliatory thirst, they just throw the whole book at the victim.

Well, back to the business on hand, in the next post.


By the way, you have not told me yet, are you the mod or admin here who is a Buddhist?

Yrreg

 

[yrreg]

The Amazing Ryokan, as in The Amazing Randi.

Originally Posted by yrreg
Now, where does Buddhism with karma, rebirth, Nirvana, and anatta come in here?​

Karma, rebirth, nirvana and anatta doesn't have anything to do with this, the four noble truths do.

...Gautama Buddha didn't know much about modern astrophysics...

...Gautama Buddha didn't know much about modern astrophysics...​

That's why you should not take him as the all and only authority for a world-view and a life-philosophy or religion.

Anyway, I am learning how to do a poll here on Buddhists to find out what they believe of the Buddhism as believed in and practiced by the elitist Buddhists in traditional Buddhist lands of the Far East -- because some of you just go for the meditation practice, others go all the way to be even more Buddha-crazed than the folks in millennial Buddha-lands.

Originally Posted by yrreg
Tell me most honestly, without tergiversations and reservations:

Are you two gentlemen, Ryokan and Dancing David, converts to your peculiar kinds of Buddhism from:

(a) contacts with Buddhists who influenced you into accepting Buddhism...​

No, I've never talked to another Buddhist before, except a friend of mine from Burma who I met just a year ago through the Red Cross.

(b) accidentally having come across and read the text of the Pali Canon?​

The short answer would be yes. Note that the Pali Canon is the Theravada Canon...

You mean that you converted to Buddhism from coming to the text of the Pali Canon accidentally like inside a bottle washed ashore in the beach, and reading it? Forgive me, but hahaha?

Hahaha? when scholars of Buddhist scriptures are still working out a systematic hermeneutics to understand Buddhist texts, but getting nowhere save deeper and deeper into abysmal labyrinths? See Buddhist Hermeneutics, a Conference Report.

Originally Posted by yrreg
...[IIDB admins and mods] have a conspicuous sympathy with Buddhists and some are even Buddhists, because being atheists they think that they should side with Buddhists who also give the impression that they advocate atheism -- they don't know that Gautama is a polytheist in real life if he ever did exist.​

Evidence that Gautama was a polytheist?

Search the Pali Canon, or ask the Western Buddhists who sport the title of Bhikkhu and they will tell you that Gautama takes for granted the existence of gods, like the Greek ones, who dwell in the realm of the gods, into this realm traditional Buddhists hope to be reborn into, for it is a domain of continuous partying.

Anyway, here, read this text below from a Western Buddhist scholar.

In Buddhism, it is taught that there are various realms, ... The first group includes three of the six realms and they are the realm of the gods, the realm of the demigods and the realm of human beings. Rebirth in these fortunate realms is the result of wholesome karma.

The sixth realm, the realm of the gods (Devas) is the happiest amongst the six realms. As a result of having done wholesome actions, of having observed the moral precepts and having practised meditation, living beings are reborn amongst the gods where they enjoy sensual pleasure or spiritual pleasure, or tranquillity depending upon the level within the realm of the gods in which they are born.

Extract from "Fundamentals of Buddhism", by Dr. Peter Della Santina.
http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhism/bs-s07c.htm

Yrreg

=========================================

My words may not be soothing, but consider the ideas

The Buddhist non-self, and its implications, living the everyday non-self existence?
http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/ind...ost&pid=500486

[From the Kalama Sutra by Gautama]

01. Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it long ago.
02. Do not believe in traditions simply because they have been handed down for many generations.
03. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.
04. Do not confirm anything just because it agrees with your scriptures.
05. Do not foolishly make assumptions.
06. Do not abruptly draw conclusions by what you see and hear.
07. Do not be fooled by outward appearances.
08. Do not hold on tightly to any view or idea just because you are comfortable with it.
09. Do not accept as fact anything that you yourself find to be logical.
10. Do not be convinced of anything out of respect and deference to your spiritual teachers.
11. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.​

But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reasons and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.

See: http://www.buddhistinformation.com/the_kalama_sutra.htm