The Buddha Was Wrong, a Skeptical Buddhist Site

Complexity said:
Yrreg - I think you should forgo posting here, where you are obviously casting pearls before swine, and invest your time, instead, on your 'contemplation of man, life, nature, and the universe'.
Click to expand...

(bolded mine)

The irony here is that pearls are created through excessive irritation. They're, like, waste products.
 
Just be succinct and precise for the education of ourselves and readers here.

I said, Dancing David, that I could not see any allegation from you to the effect that there is something in the eightfold path supposedly from Gautama that is original with him.

Let's put it this way: you just mention one item to be an original discovery or invention of Gautama, and I will tell you after critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence whether it is an original discovery or invention of Gautama, that no one else ever before him had discovered already or invented.

Like this: one single item = right thought (or some other like right speech, but just one, so that we will not invest too much time and get lost, specially you are by nature emotionally prone).

About anatta, I see that you maintain it is original with Gautama; yes? no?

If yes, then I will just repeat that I seem to have learned in my reading about anatta (whatever it is supposed to be) from Buddhist sources that the item was already speculated about among peers of Gautama way back before his birth, then also it is highly disputed among Buddhist worthies themselves whether if at all Gautama taught that item, and likewise among these similar doctrinaires they are not in unison how to understand it.


Please respond, and of course dispense yourself from uttering unseemly sounds which will dismay your mother should she be around to read your messages here in this JREF educational forum -- otherwise I must congratulate your mother for having brought you up as to be interested in exchange of views here, or the semblance of from your highly emotionally charged personality.


[Just in jest, even though it came from you not once but twice with emphasis: don't hurl your private parts around, just keep them in that special box of an asylum which you told us you do routinely.]​


Yrreg
 
Yrreg - The whole Monty-Python-Frenchman-From-Tower speech in your general direction.

You are monkey-sphincter nasty.

Is that "succinct and precise" enough for you?
 
yrreg said:
I said, Dancing David, that I could not see any allegation from you to the effect that there is something in the eightfold path supposedly from Gautama that is original with him.
Click to expand...
And again that was not your original claim, nor was it mine. I will post the complete post that you placed in this thread.

You added the legal stuff after your first post.

that is what makes you a slippery ell, a charlatan, a scoundrel and a liar.

You are not a man to be trusted Yrreg, you have no honor and do not keep to your words.
Let's put it this way: you just mention one item to be an original discovery or invention of Gautama, and I will tell you after critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence whether it is an original discovery or invention of Gautama, that no one else ever before him had discovered already or invented.
Click to expand...
I have stated that I believe the eightfold path as interpreted in the light of annatta is unique to the alleged teachings of alleged historical buddha.

You are the one who claims that it is not original to the buddha.

The burden of proof is on you to defend your statements and to show them to be true.

Which being a liar and a scoundrel, you will be unable to do.
Like this: one single item = right thought (or some other like right speech, but just one, so that we will not invest too much time and get lost, specially you are by nature emotionally prone).
Click to expand...
Apparently your comprehension of the English language and the rules of logic are failing Yrreg.

I sated that the eightfold path is something I believe to be unique (especially as interpreted by annatta and citta) and being something that appears to be original to the buddha.

1. The eightfold path is the eightfold path.
2. Right/correct/healthy though is one part of the eightfold path, not the eightfold path. It is though I said that a 'car' is apparently original to the 'carbuddha' and you sate that "Wheels already exist".

So I will pretend that you are not ignorant or stupid and believe that you are willfully misinterpreting.

Just so you can pretend that you are not a liar.
About annatta, I see that you maintain it is original with Gautama; yes? no?

If yes, then I will just repeat that I seem to have learned in my reading about annatta (whatever it is supposed to be) from Buddhist sources that the item was already speculated about among peers of Gautama way back before his birth, then also it is highly disputed among Buddhist worthies themselves whether if at all Gautama taught that item, and likewise among these similar doctrinaires they are not in unison how to understand it.
Click to expand...
Where is your proof, any citations any evidence, any quotes?

Why don't you quote Pes Oir Amsus for us?

You shame yourself Yrreg, according to academic rigor, of which you have none, you are the one making the claim, it is your burden to prove it.

Have at it!
Please respond, and of course dispense yourself from uttering unseemly sounds which will dismay your mother should she be around to read your messages here in this JREF educational forum -- otherwise I must congratulate your mother for having brought you up as to be interested in exchange of views here, or the semblance of from your highly emotionally charged personality.
Click to expand...
Your behavior is what marks you as a charlatan and a liar. I shall post your response to my welcome to you in this thread.

1. You have not lived up to the words you posted.
2. You have tried to change the boundaries or your first post in response to me.
3. You have made numerous and foolish additions to your original statement.
4. You are unable to provide proof and evidence of your claims.

I will do as I have with other posters Yrreg:

I say that you are foresworn (you have not kept to your words) and therefore I label you currently as a liar. If you follow through on your original response to me in this thread then I will post a formal apology to you on the R&P and Community forum.

Until such time in this thread, you are a liar, scoundrel, charlatan and blackguard.
[Just in jest, even though it came from you not once but twice with emphasis: don't hurl your private parts around, just keep them in that special box of an asylum which you told us you do routinely.]​


Yrreg
Click to expand...

PS watch Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
 
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2662397&postcount=453

Thread: The Buddha Was Wrong, a Skeptical Buddhist Site View Single Post
4th June 2007, 07:01 PM #453
yrreg
Muse




Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 760
My Profile The obstacle with Buddhists here.

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

Originally Posted by Dancing David
Ah Welcome back Yrreg!

You were never able to substantiate that claim the first time or all the other times you made it.

Can you show us where that is true?

Will you show us where the eightfold path is predated in other places?
Click to expand...
I don't want to state anything anymore about what the whole world understands to be Buddhism, because the Buddhists here will say that it is not the genuine Buddhism, as intended by Gautama.

So I am asking them to mention a piece of genuine Buddhism and I will tell them whether it makes sense from a scientific and rationalist skeptical assessment -- or not.

At this point they will demure, and say instead that they are Buddhists because they call themselves Buddhists.

That is why it is impossible to have an intelligent and productive discussion with Buddhists here. They don't have any idea of communication.


Yrreg



yrreg
View Public Profile
Send a private message to yrreg
Quote this post in a PM to yrreg
Find More Posts by yrreg
Add yrreg to Your Ignore List
Add yrreg to Your Buddy List
 
Thank you, DD!

You're beginning to sound a lot like me.

Maybe there's still hope for me.

I don't think that Yrreg is a Monty Python kind of guy. It would be fun to watch him watching Holy Grail and Life of Brian.
 
I will just bring out what is succinct and precise from your abundance of words.

Here is what I find to be your categorical response to my request that you give me just one item from the eightfold path which you maintain to be original with the Gautama, and also your comments to my finding from my reading that anatta was already discussed prior to Gautama's birth and Buddhist enthusiasts from the start to the present are not united on exactly what it is.

Dancing David said:
[...]

I have stated that I believe the eightfold path as interpreted in the light of annatta is unique to the alleged teachings of alleged historical buddha.

[...]

I sated that the eightfold path is something I believe to be unique (especially as interpreted by annatta and citta) and being something that appears to be original to the buddha.

[...]
Click to expand...

.​

And I as a citizen of this universe engaged in critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence but attached to the ideal of free thought and free speech, grant you the privilege to freely believe and to freely express your beliefs, all in the name of religious liberty.


Yrreg
 
yrreg said:
And I as a citizen of this universe engaged in critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence but attached to the ideal of free thought and free speech, grant you the privilege to freely believe and to freely express your beliefs, all in the name of religious liberty.

Yrreg
Click to expand...


(bolding mine)

Yrreg, I'm thinking of something that I'll grant you the privilege of doing?

Have you got a clear picture of what I'm thinking?

You bossy little twit.
 
yrreg said:
Here is what I find to be your categorical response to my request that you give me just one item from the eightfold path which you maintain to be original with the Gautama, and also your comments to my finding from my reading that anatta was already discussed prior to Gautama's birth and Buddhist enthusiasts from the start to the present are not united on exactly what it is.



.​

And I as a citizen of this universe engaged in critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence but attached to the ideal of free thought and free speech, grant you the privilege to freely believe and to freely express your beliefs, all in the name of religious liberty.


Yrreg
Click to expand...


And so why does the eightfold path, which is meant to reference and impact the value of each path in combination with the other paths, with annatta and citta as interpretive guides:

Answer me this Yrreg,

How does the eightfold path fit into:
"So I am asking them to mention a piece of genuine Buddhism and I will tell them whether it makes sense from a scientific and rationalist skeptical assessment -- or not."

Your opening response to me?

Annatta, citta and the eightfold path are a piece and pieces of 'genuine buddhism". They are taught in all schools of buddhism, they are at the core of the alleged historical buddha's alleged teaching.

So established:

part A.: the eightfold path, citta and annatta are taught by all schools of buddhism.
part B.: as such the eightfold path, citta and annatta are most likely to be "genuine buddhism".
part C.: As genuine buddhism, the eightfold path as interpreted and along with annatt5a and citta, are subject to the phrase:

"So I am asking them to mention a piece of genuine Buddhism and I will tell them whether it makes sense from a scientific and rationalist skeptical assessment -- or not."

In that mention has been made by me in this and prior threads that I believe the eightfold path to be the core of buddhism, and is also considered to be 'genuine buddhism" in that all schools of buddhism teach them.
Therefore as the state of mentioning has been achieved, and a set of objects referred to as "the eightfold path" has been established as genuine buddhism.

The question arises as to when a reader might expect Yrreg to "tell them whether it makes sense from a scientific and rationalist skeptical assessment -- or not".

The reader might wonder?

As in: I have responded repeatedly to at least two requests by you to mention something that appears to genuine to the buddha, I state the eightfold path, you ask for something original to the buddha, I have stated the eightfold path, to which you haven't really responded.

You asked me for what I considered the eightfold path to be, I did so, you asked me to oath that I felt the eightfold path was genuine buddhism, I took a mighty oath.

And now dear Yrreg, you still have not done as you have stated that you would do, I have stated that the eightfold path is genuine buddhism, if such a person as gautama shayamuni ever existed I believe that the eightfold path is likely to have originated with the alleged historical buddha.

So the eightfold path is genuine buddhism and I believe like as anything to be original buddhism.

So when prey tell dear Yrreg shall you offer your discussion of "whether it makes sense from a scientific and rationalist skeptical assessment -- or not." In this case the "it" being referenced as being the eightfold path.

All conditions being met to have the phrase

"So I am asking them to mention a piece of genuine Buddhism and I will tell them whether it makes sense from a scientific and rationalist skeptical assessment -- or not."

I am waiting for your sceptical, scientific and rational discussion of the eightfold path.


Perhaps you shall dash my hopes to the ground and once again leave me convinced that thou art a scallywag, charlatan and poseur. I await my chance to openly apologize to you and take back my statement: "Yrreg is a liar".
 
yrreg,

yrreg said:
I have the impression that you hold some teachings of Buddhism to be original with the Gautama, and I am most keen to examine them in the light of critical thinking and empirical evidence.

Will you just tell me what these teachings are which for you are original with the Gautama, namely, that before he came along mankind had not ever heard of such teachings?
Click to expand...

That is a very good question, one that I think deserves its own thread; nevertheless, I would like to post a quick response. To begin with, not everything that the Buddha taught was unknown to his contemporaries. While it is true that the Buddha used many words and concepts that were well-known long before his birth, he often used those words and concepts differently than they were originally used by those of his time, giving them his own unique meaning and context. This is clearly documented with a varitey of words such as brahmin, kamma, khandha, nibbana, et cetera. The Buddha was also an expert at word play, especially puns, although those do not always translate well into English; therefore, there were often linguistic and philosophical reasons for his choice in adopting certain terms and concepts, as well as humor of course.

To give one example of what I mean, in the introduction to his translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, Bhikkhu Bodhi addresses the Brahmanasamyutta, where the Buddha's conversations with various brahmins are recorded. In particular he writes, "He here interprets the word "brahmin" by way of its original meaning, as a holy man, and on this basis redefines the true brahmin as the arahant. The three Vedas which the brahimns revered and diligently studied are replaced by the three vijjas or true knowledges possessed by the arahant: knowledge of past births, of the laws of kammic retribution, and of the destruction of the taints" (83-4).

In addition, at the time of the Buddha the word khandha simply meant "aggregate", "heap", or "mass". The Buddha, however, gave the word khandha a completely new and unique meaning, applying it to the five clinging-aggregates of experience (ie. form, feelings, perceptions, formations, and consciousness). Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains that, "Prior to the Buddha, the Pali word khandha had very ordinary meanings: A khandha could be a pile, a bundle, a heap, a mass. It could also be the trunk of a tree. In his first sermon, though, the Buddha gave it a new, psychological meaning, introducing the term 'clinging-khandhas' to summarize his analysis of the truth of stress and suffering. Throughout the remainder of his teaching career, he referred to these psychological khandhas time and again" (Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Five Piles of Bricks, 2002).

Jason
 
Last edited:
Elohim said:
yrreg,



That is a very good question, one that I think deserves its own thread; nevertheless, I would like to post a quick response. To begin with, not everything that the Buddha taught was unknown to his contemporaries. While it is true that the Buddha used many words and concepts that were well-known long before his birth, he often used those words and concepts differently than they were originally used by those of his time, giving them his own unique meaning and context. This is clearly documented with a varitey of words such as brahmin, kamma, khandha, nibbana, et cetera. The Buddha was also an expert at word play, especially puns, although those do not always translate well into English; therefore, there were often linguistic and philosophical reasons for his choice in adopting certain terms and concepts, as well as humor of course.

To give one example of what I mean, in the introduction to his translation of the Samyutta Nikaya, Bhikkhu Bodhi addresses the Brahmanasamyutta, where the Buddha's conversations with various brahmins are recorded. In particular he writes, "He here interprets the word "brahmin" by way of its original meaning, as a holy man, and on this basis redefines the true brahmin as the arahant. The three Vedas which the brahimns revered and diligently studied are replaced by the three vijjas or true knowledges possessed by the arahant: knowledge of past births, of the laws of kammic retribution, and of the destruction of the taints" (83-4).

In addition, at the time of the Buddha the word khandha simply meant "aggregate", "heap", or "mass". The Buddha, however, gave the word khandha a completely new and unique meaning, appying it to the five clinging-aggregates of experience (ie. form, feelings, perceptions, formations, and consciousness). Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains that, "Prior to the Buddha, the Pali word khandha had very ordinary meanings: A khandha could be a pile, a bundle, a heap, a mass. It could also be the trunk of a tree. In his first sermon, though, the Buddha gave it a new, psychological meaning, introducing the term 'clinging-khandhas' to summarize his analysis of the truth of stress and suffering. Throughout the remainder of his teaching career, he referred to these psychological khandhas time and again" (Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Five Piles of Bricks, 2002).

Jason
Click to expand...

thank you jason.
 
Everyone,

Perhaps this might also be of interest: "Lastly, the contributions to Indian thought made by the Buddha should be carefully borne in mind. It was no doubt the Buddha's admirable sense of humility, which led to his statement that he was not an original thinker. His theory of Dependent Causation or Origination was the most remarkable contribution to Indian thought. It is unique in the history of philosophy" (Ananda W. P. Guruge, The Place of Buddhism in Indian Thought).

Sincerely,

Jason
 
yrreg said:
Dear Ryoko and Dancing David:

Peace and good will.



I have the impression that you hold some teachings of Buddhism to be original with the Gautama, and I am most keen to examine them in the light of critical thinking and empirical evidence.

Will you just tell me what these teachings are which for you are original with the Gautama, namely, that before he came along mankind had not ever heard of such teachings?


Pleazzzzzzzzzzzzzz....


Yrreg
Click to expand...


From: http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=92886#92886


yrreg said:
What is Buddha's problem with the self? He seems to be the only guy in the history of mankind to have a problem with the self. If you were never introduced to Buddhism, would you ever have a problem with the self? Now exactly what is his problem with the self, Buddha's, or the schools of Buddhism that has this problem?

The problem as I see it -- remember no one else has it until Buddha or Buddhism appeared in the horizon of human problem solving -- is that he wants to prove that it does not exist, or he is not bothered by the thought of his own coming to old age, diseases, and death.
Click to expand...


:rolleyes:
 
thebuddhawaswrong.com URL co-opted

Does anyone know where content on thebuddhawaswrong site went. It appears to have become a parking lot site for banal advertising.

I am researching the growth of Western Buddhism and how it is making a lot of money for the select few, notoriously Sakyong Mipham of Shambhala International.

I'm deeply suspicious of any cult that charges money (lots of money) to achieve salvation. Unfortunately, many of the New Age Buddhist movements (typically the westernized Tibetan varieties, like Shambhala, beloved by the trendies) in the US are deeply focused on doing just that, and have become highly effective at marketing their training, books and other goodies.

In contrast, Thanissaro Bhikkhu of the Theravada tradition, gives his time and his writings for free: a hallmark of a genuine spiritual teacher.

Any and all sources of information you can provide re: unmasking the less-spiritual sides of Buddhist groups would be most gratefully received.
 
PastorJennifer said:
Does anyone know where content on thebuddhawaswrong site went. It appears to have become a parking lot site for banal advertising.

I am researching the growth of Western Buddhism and how it is making a lot of money for the select few, notoriously Sakyong Mipham of Shambhala International.

I'm deeply suspicious of any cult that charges money (lots of money) to achieve salvation. Unfortunately, many of the New Age Buddhist movements (typically the westernized Tibetan varieties, like Shambhala, beloved by the trendies) in the US are deeply focused on doing just that, and have become highly effective at marketing their training, books and other goodies.

In contrast, Thanissaro Bhikkhu of the Theravada tradition, gives his time and his writings for free: a hallmark of a genuine spiritual teacher.

Any and all sources of information you can provide re: unmasking the less-spiritual sides of Buddhist groups would be most gratefully received.
Click to expand...

Cool question! I will see what I can find. I am not there was that much on the site when i read it.
 
Yeah, sorry guys, i took it down about 4 months ago.

The good news is that i put it back up today :)

www.thebuddhawaswrong.com

If it doesn;t show up it is because the DNS is still circulating, supossedly it can take around 72 hours, it has been up for 24 hours.

If it isnt up when you check, it has been turnd into a free book which you can download here: http://www.lulu.com/content/1931167
 
What spam?

This thread is about this site which was started by someone else over 6 months ago and the 2 previous posters wanted to know what happened to it.

The new thread is about the new book. THis thread is over 10 pages long and is off topic hence the new thread.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom