Buddhism as amusement.

[Dancing David]

According to the standard account of Gautama's turning point in life, whereby he could not find anymore satisfaction in his luxurious and kingly secure existence: he accidentally saw a decrepit old man, a gravely sick man, a rotting corpse, and an itinerant monk leading a life of self-deprivations.

He was devastated by the realization of what awaited him: helpless old age, disease, and death; and he thought that he could attain imperturbability by adopting the life of the itinerant monk. That did not liberate him from the dread of old age, disease, and death; for he continued to get older and older, he still got sick every so often, and he still could not escape from the face of death looking at him with a sneer chilling his bones. All that was suffering for him as for everyone else even to this very day in the most advanced of society.

Then one day he came to what I might call his moment of eureka: the discovery that the cause of suffering is desire; so get rid of desire and you will be liberated from suffering.

On his earthly departure he was not liberated from death for he died the common demise of every man,

Nope, no dying god he, merely mortal. No promises made by his followers that he was god man either. That little bit of mythology is not the buddha's

and not liberated from sickness for he died from lethal food poisoning as he -- notwithstanding having proclaimed himself or been acclaimed by his followers to be enlightened -- unwittingly ingested spoiled meat

Which part of enlightenment was supposed to protect him from toxic mushrooms or bad pork?
No, no super hero he, claiming supernatural powers.

, and not liberated from the decay of death for they cremated his corpse, the quick annihilation by fire instead of the slow malodorous feasting of worms.

I don't recall any statement that he would escape death, illness or old age. Could you point out for my slow witt why that should be important?

The myth is that he encountered the things that he might have suffered from, sickness, death and old age. But unlike the mistaken followers of jesus, who never said he was immortal, the mistaken followers of the buddha never claimed his immortality or superhero status.

Are Buddhists today 2500 years after the departure of their founder and 2500 years of meditating on his doctrines and observing his ordinances, are they any nearer to liberation from helpless old age, disease, and death? emancipation from desire and hence from suffering?

That would be dependant on the defintion of suffering now would it, did the buddha say he would be liberated?
Emancipation from suffe5ring, from what the sages have written, is not the emancipation from physical pain or old age, sickness and death.

So, what has Buddhism contributed to make life safer, better, and longer, enable mankind to lead healthier and more comfortable lives?

That might bee xplianed to those who were interested.

No, not as far as anyone with working eyes can see; but they are still into the discussion of anatta, dukkha, karma, samsara [and que sera sera* -- from an irreverent wit].

That is the usual habit with human nature, instead of facing the problem and solving it, from indolence and pusillanimity it prefers to direct its attention to the metaphysics of the pointless kind.


Yrreg

Que sera sera -- Spanish: what will be will be.

I must be very old and forgetfull, I thought sera was the future tense of to be in Italian not in spanish. Oh well old brain have I.

 

[Dancing David]

About Western Buddhists, I am very disappointed with them, because I expect them to be independent and self-sufficient.

If they long for a religion, why not make one themselves for themselves?

They can consult me for doing a DIY religion. a customized religion or what we might call self-designers religion.

Some have Yrreg, it is called paganism, it is alos one of the critiques of western buddhists, that in fact you made on this board, that they pick and choose which parts of buddhism they will follow.

We are living at no other time in history when all the religions in history and currently flourishing in the world stage can be examined by us, to pick out the elements most useful to ourselves and put together for our very own religion and spirituality.

That is why I am very disappointed with Westerners, for not exercising freedom and independence in religion as in everything else.

I see so all westerners have taken a path? I think that your broad brush is getting broader.
Many turn to fundamental Xianity , some turn to Islam, some to the Bahai, etc., etc., some even to non-religion.

On the one hand they want to tell everyone that Buddha was just a man like you and me, and on the other hand they believe that Buddha had found the ultimate truth for mankind in regard to the end destiny of man and the cosmos.

I know you can only cite yorself, but could you at least give a reference to that.
I am curious where you found that.

The two propositions don't jibe together. Fact is Westerners who profess Buddhism are afraid to be free and independent when it comes to religion which in their society is the one thing that is guaranteed the utmost of freedom and independence and absolute non-conformism.

Except of course when they aren't.

The founding fathers of the USA where often crooks, liars and hypocrites Yrreg.
One of my favorite libertarians, Madison, opposed the impotation of slaves but not of slavery. he wanted to profit from the breeding and owning of slaves. yet he and others created the amendments known as the bill of rights.
There is no modern miracle of non-belief in the 'west', that is why sceptics exist and have places like the JREF to meet. I suggest that you peruse this bulletin board and see how many mistaken beliefs might be discussed.

 

[Taffer]

He's still at it? Wow, that's dedication right there, folks.

 

[yrreg]

Statement of opinion or of fact?

Que sera sera -- Spanish: what will be will be. -- Yrreg ​

I must be very old and forgetfull, I thought sera was the future tense of to be in Italian not in spanish. Oh well old brain have I. -- Dancing David

Is that a statement of opinion or a statement of fact?

According to the uncivil mob in the Skeptics Friends Net (and what friends they are), Skeptics are soft on Buddhism from me is a statement of fact, and therefore I must produce evidence to prove it; however I and my real friend there, McQ, maintain that it is a statement of opinion which does not require any evidence, but at most some grounds for uttering it as to make it worth some thinking and investigating.

Again:

Que sera sera -- Spanish: what will be will be. -- Yrreg ​

I must be very old and forgetfull, I thought sera was the future tense of to be in Italian not in spanish. Oh well old brain have I. -- Dancing David

Let me know when you have made up your mind, about your statement above.


Yrreg

 

[yrreg]

A mental pastime, a hobby of research for my leisure hours.

I have enjoyed our communication, but it now appears you have no actual interest in learning anything. This leaves me uncertain as to what has motivated you to spend the time and energy you have to 'examining' Buddhism. Regardless, I do not believe you and I have anything of benefit to offer each other at this time. Perhaps another time. -- username

I do have an interest in learning things, but more and more I have come to the realization that if we will know anything at all about man and what he can do for himself here and beyond or ultra this biological life, we must start from man’s physiology and its interaction with the world of physics and chemistry.

And to this end I now always bring up or keep in mind the stone in a trajectory headed toward a person’s head.


I notice that you are attached to your strain of Buddhism, unlike myself who am just into Buddhism as a mental pastime, a hobby of research; thus it cannot be otherwise than just like with a son you love much or a wife you drool over, you cannot be critical about Buddhism’s intrinsic worth for meeting the genuine concerns of man, starting first with how to live longer, better, and eventually dispensing with death altogether, the three ills the Buddha started out to address his worry and fear on seeing a helpless old man, a diseased man, and a rotting cadaver.

But the labor was too impossible for being overwhelming in his times that he escaped into the realm of the anatta, karma, dukkha, nirvana, samsara and as I said earlier as an irreverent wit, the que sera sera.

That is why it is all amusement to me when Buddhists go into anatta, karma, dukkha, nirvana, samsara and as I said earlier as an irreverent wit, the que sera sera, all which are so pointless, more pointless than those questions your master, Buddha, inhibited his followers even the Westerners currently still in self-elicited awe over Buddhism, not to go into.


Yrreg

 

[username]

According to the uncivil mob in the Skeptics Friends Net (and what friends they are), Skeptics are soft on Buddhism from me is a statement of fact...

Perhaps that is because Buddhism doesn't make many woo woo claims? The 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path are the core of Buddhism. Move much beyond that and there is material for skeptics to analyze, but there isn't anything about being Buddhist that requires anything more than the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path. Anything added to it is at the discretion of the practitioner. In Buddhism there is no resurrection, no creation of the cosmos, no immortal soul. In other words Buddhism just isn't much fun for skeptics to analyze.

I do have an interest in learning things, but more and more I have come to the realization that if we will know anything at all about man and what he can do for himself here and beyond or ultra this biological life, we must start from man’s physiology and its interaction with the world of physics and chemistry.

This makes no sense to me in the context of Buddhism, but OK.

I notice that you are attached to your strain of Buddhism, unlike myself who am just into Buddhism as a mental pastime, a hobby of research; thus it cannot be otherwise than just like with a son you love much or a wife you drool over, you cannot be critical about Buddhism’s intrinsic worth for meeting the genuine concerns of man, starting first with how to live longer, better, and eventually dispensing with death altogether, the three ills the Buddha started out to address his worry and fear on seeing a helpless old man, a diseased man, and a rotting cadaver.

I wasn't aware I had a 'strain' of Buddhism. I generally don't label myself as a Buddhist although I find the 4 noble truths and 8 fold path to be of great benefit to me. What I do not understand is why you think Buddhism or Buddha himself is concerned with escaping illness and death? I accept that life involves constant change. I am changing as I type this. I will age and I will die. Buddhism can certainly help dispel the fear and anxiety that often accompanies thoughts of illness, aging and death (and change in general), but it most certainly doesn't remove them nor does it claim to.

That is why it is all amusement to me when Buddhists go into anatta, karma, dukkha, nirvana, samsara and as I said earlier as an irreverent wit, the que sera sera, all which are so pointless, more pointless than those questions your master, Buddha, inhibited his followers even the Westerners currently still in self-elicited awe over Buddhism, not to go into.
Yrreg

These terms have all been explained to you by others in this thread previously, but you appear to be continuing to misuse them. Previously I stated that you appear to me to be uninterested in learning about Buddhism, but at this point it appears you are not simply uninterested, but resistant. You do not appear to actually absorb the information provided to you by others in your own thread.

That is quite sad, you must have great pain to persist in what you call a critical examination of Buddhism while being (apparently) unable to even absorb plainly stated information given to you.

It would be one thing to understand and disagree, but it is quite another to be incapable of understanding despite having ample intelligence.

 

[Dancing David]

Is that a statement of opinion or a statement of fact?

According to the uncivil mob in the Skeptics Friends Net (and what friends they are), Skeptics are soft on Buddhism from me is a statement of fact, and therefore I must produce evidence to prove it; however I and my real friend there, McQ, maintain that it is a statement of opinion which does not require any evidence, but at most some grounds for uttering it as to make it worth some thinking and investigating.

Again:


Let me know when you have made up your mind, about your statement above.


Yrreg

I will continue in doubt since it is likely to be the future tense in both languages. So a statement of opinion?

 

[Dancing David]

I do have an interest in learning things, but more and more I have come to the realization that if we will know anything at all about man and what he can do for himself here and beyond or ultra this biological life, we must start from man’s physiology and its interaction with the world of physics and chemistry.

And to this end I now always bring up or keep in mind the stone in a trajectory headed toward a person’s head.

The stone's trajectory might intersect with the body. Something that does exist according to the buddha.

But if we stick to physics ans chemisty then the 'self' as soul or transcendantal self, anything more than the temporary self is not sunbject to physics and chemistry.

So while the buddhists who believe in reincarnation are likely to be subject to scepticism. Those who feel there is an immortal soul or self are also likely to be subject to criticism.

I notice that you are attached to your strain of Buddhism, unlike myself who am just into Buddhism as a mental pastime, a hobby of research; thus it cannot be otherwise than just like with a son you love much or a wife you drool over, you cannot be critical about Buddhism’s intrinsic worth for meeting the genuine concerns of man, starting first with how to live longer, better, and eventually dispensing with death altogether, the three ills the Buddha started out to address his worry and fear on seeing a helpless old man, a diseased man, and a rotting cadaver.

I think many people including myself have showed you scepticism of various parts of buddhism, in fact I have generated pages of material that I am very sceptical of.

Where did the buddha say that he was setting out to overcome death, illness and old age?

Dispensing with death sounds dangerously woo to me.

But the labor was too impossible for being overwhelming in his times that he escaped into the realm of the anatta, karma, dukkha, nirvana, samsara and as I said earlier as an irreverent wit, the que sera sera.

Acceptance of suffering, if one has suffering is part of the path. The words describe transient states of being in the five heaps(skandhas), one can not escape to them if one is a buddhist (IMO).

Perhaps accept and detach.

That is why it is all amusement to me when Buddhists go into anatta, karma, dukkha, nirvana, samsara and as I said earlier as an irreverent wit, the que sera sera, all which are so pointless, more pointless than those questions your master, Buddha, inhibited his followers even the Westerners currently still in self-elicited awe over Buddhism, not to go into.


Yrreg

And that is how it should be, if you find no merit to the teachings of the buddha then by all means don't follow them.

 

[yrreg]

Statement of fact or statement of opinion, Buddhism?

Que sera sera -- Spanish: what will be will be. -- Yrreg

I must be very old and forgetfull, I thought sera was the future tense of to be in Italian not in spanish. Oh well old brain have I. -- Dancing David

Let me know when you have made up your mind, about your statement above. [Whether you are making a statement of fact or a statement of opinion.]


I will continue in doubt since it is likely to be the future tense in both languages. So a statement of opinion? – Dancing David

You will continue to doubt? Is there a need or a condition which you are limited to or constrained in or imprisoned in preventing you from resolving the doubt?

I said earlier here that I had a thread once in another forum where I talked about the attraction for myself to seek residency in a prison, so that I wouldn't have to worry about making a living, but present prison conditions in an advanced democratic society allow me to read and write and search the opinions of mankind and the facts discovered by mankind down the course of man's history.

Imagine as you are actually situated outside prison and thus more so, you are in an advanced democratic society where you can access the opinions and facts database of mankind stored already and still being added to every second of our living life, can you please just resolve your doubt whether in the clause Que sera sera, the sera is Italian or Spanish?

Hint: Take into account all the present circumstances where the clause is well-known to people who do read and have their attention posted on all fields of human endeavors the last fifty years, and resolve your doubt so as to be able to say with a true honest face that your determination one way or the other is beyond reasonable doubt.

And please abstain from the ruse of the mob in Skeptics Friends Net of what I call argumentum ad evidentiam et definitionem or perverse demand for more and more evidence and endless definition.

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

What does it mean to explain to and to understand in regard to Buddhist concepts, doctrines, and observances? This brings in the question on what criteria are Buddhist concepts, doctrines, and observances to be judged as explainable and understandable which criteria should apply to concepts, doctrines, and practices in any other system of knowledge and life and endeavors? I submit the criteria must be those which also apply to the phenomenon of a stone in a trajectory toward a person's head, which criteria enable me to explain to a person who had never experienced being hit by a stray stone in his head, and enable him to understand.

I do not accept and I believe there should be no special criteria whereby Buddhists can explain and can understand among themselves their concepts, doctrines, and observances, which to others who do not accept their special criteria find them to be at most for amusement only, a mental pastime, a hobby of research.

Aside from the facts of life and common conventions accepted universally and observed among men, the rest of Buddhist concepts, doctrines, and observances are all founded on opinions.

These terms have all been explained to you by others in this thread previously, but you appear to be continuing to misuse them. -- username​

To misuse them as to see the fun in them, is that objectionable in polite society among people engaged in an online forum?

Take my favorite scenario of a stone in a trajectory headed toward my head or your head, would that be a matter to have fun in? Unless of course the whole scenario is on a stage as in professional wrestling.

When I am in an academic setting, say, in a gathering of world convention of religions, then I will not mention even though I have it in my mind and heart the genuine fun aspect in Buddhist as in other religious concepts, doctrines, and observances.

But in an online forum of the present instant kind, even without enlightenment Buddhists would also see with me the fun in their concepts, doctrines, and observances, and we could have a good laugh together; but they will tell me, "That is why you must have faith in the Buddha; otherwise everything is so laughable, amusing."

And I hope they can see with me that Buddha's words are all his opinions, however enlightened they are taken to be on faith by his followers.


Yrreg

 

[Dancing David]

You will continue to doubt? Is there a need or a condition which you are limited to or constrained in or imprisoned in preventing you from resolving the doubt?

Not in the least ,disinterest more likely.

I said earlier here that I had a thread once in another forum where I talked about the attraction for myself to seek residency in a prison, so that I wouldn't have to worry about making a living, but present prison conditions in an advanced democratic society allow me to read and write and search the opinions of mankind and the facts discovered by mankind down the course of man's history.

I suppose, but it doesn't sound like the prisons in Illinois, and the food is allegedly atrocious.

Imagine as you are actually situated outside prison and thus more so, you are in an advanced democratic society where you can access the opinions and facts database of mankind stored already and still being added to every second of our living life, can you please just resolve your doubt whether in the clause Que sera sera, the sera is Italian or Spanish?

Of course i could , if I was interested.

Hint: Take into account all the present circumstances where the clause is well-known to people who do read and have their attention posted on all fields of human endeavors the last fifty years, and resolve your doubt so as to be able to say with a true honest face that your determination one way or the other is beyond reasonable doubt.

And please abstain from the ruse of the mob in Skeptics Friends Net of what I call argumentum ad evidentiam et definitionem or perverse demand for more and more evidence and endless definition.

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

What does it mean to explain to and to understand in regard to Buddhist concepts, doctrines, and observances? This brings in the question on what criteria are Buddhist concepts, doctrines, and observances to be judged as explainable and understandable which criteria should apply to concepts, doctrines, and practices in any other system of knowledge and life and endeavors? I submit the criteria must be those which also apply to the phenomenon of a stone in a trajectory toward a person's head, which criteria enable me to explain to a person who had never experienced being hit by a stray stone in his head, and enable him to understand.

And a buddhist would move thier body away from the path of the rock. It might harm thier body, but it can't harm the non-extant soul or transcendant self.

I do not accept and I believe there should be no special criteria whereby Buddhists can explain and can understand among themselves their concepts, doctrines, and observances, which to others who do not accept their special criteria find them to be at most for amusement only, a mental pastime, a hobby of research.

Concepts are explained and ignored through exercise of freewill. The defintions are what they are, if you don't like the dharma, don't follow the eightfold path.

Aside from the facts of life and common conventions accepted universally and observed among men, the rest of Buddhist concepts, doctrines, and observances are all founded on opinions.

These terms have all been explained to you by others in this thread previously, but you appear to be continuing to misuse them. -- username​

To misuse them as to see the fun in them, is that objectionable in polite society among people engaged in an online forum?

Take my favorite scenario of a stone in a trajectory headed toward my head or your head, would that be a matter to have fun in? Unless of course the whole scenario is on a stage as in professional wrestling.

I would not find either entertaining, but then I am one who had my sense of humor surgicaly removed.

When I am in an academic setting, say, in a gathering of world convention of religions, then I will not mention even though I have it in my mind and heart the genuine fun aspect in Buddhist as in other religious concepts, doctrines, and observances.

But in an online forum of the present instant kind, even without enlightenment Buddhists would also see with me the fun in their concepts, doctrines, and observances, and we could have a good laugh together; but they will tell me, "That is why you must have faith in the Buddha; otherwise everything is so laughable, amusing."

Faith is not usualy the path to enlightenment, practice is.

I have posted pages of the more entertaining aspects of the buddhist practices. I personaly find it odd that someone would take the five precepts and still eat meat voluntarily. I know that monks are required to eat what is placed in thier bowls.

And I hope they can see with me that Buddha's words are all his opinions, however enlightened they are taken to be on faith by his followers.

I wonder if you could find a citation for the faith in the buddha. perhaps the Pure land of some sort.

Yrreg

I find the mind bending antics of the Xians more amusing. Especialy when they claim to love jesus and then hate many types of people.

 

[yrreg]

Que sera sera, Que será será, Che sarà sarà.

From my stock knowledge of Spanish and Italian, here -- and please correct me guys who are more literate in both spoken and written Spanish and Italian:

Que sera sera is Spanish but written without diacritical marks.
Que será será is Spanish written with diacritical marks.
Che sarà sarà is Italian written with diacritical marks.

I hope the diacritical marks come out in the published message of this post.

You see, written Spanish and Italian make use of the diacritical mark above the letter a to indicate that the verb será, sarà, is in the future tense.


If you guys are having fun here as I am, then we should congratulate ourselves that we are getting some education in languages as we have fun.


Yrreg

 

[yrreg]

Any good incentives for doing Buddhist meditation?

Yrreg,

Have you tried a basic (and powerful) Buddhist meditation such as the focusing on the breath mediation?

[...]

One can study automobiles all their life, but never really 'get' what an automobile is like until they drive it. It is like sitting in a dark room studying books on electricity, struggling to understand it. It becomes easier to understand if one flicks the light switch so they can better see the book.

[...]

I really can't see anything that I could and would want to achieve in Buddhist meditation which I could not but would want to achieve outside Buddhist meditation. Perhaps you can give me some objectives which Buddhist meditation can effect for a guy who does not know what it can achieve for him and that he should achieve in life.

About automobiles, I have done more things with automobiles except driving crazily than any average owners and users of automobiles. For example, I have taken apart the transmission system of one and cleaned every cog and wheel and put them all together and returned the transmission housing to the car -- all by my lone self. I practically do all repairs on my three cars by myself for fun and also for a workout.

[.....]

Shouldn't I try Buddhist meditation if for no other reason than just to do justice to Buddhism which now I study for amusement? I wouldn't flatter myself that Buddhism and Buddhists need me to do justice to them. Besides, I am really too lazy and disinterested or unmotivated to try Buddhist meditation; if there is an incentive, why not: even though by imagination I am sure I know what it is all about.

[.....]

What incentives would appeal to me to take up Buddhist meditation just for an experiment? Most probably if I could have a better living than the one I am now already contented with; read that good earnings doing Buddhist meditation, like Randi does doing skepticism instead of performing magic stunts on a stage, and also having terrific fun with his million dollar challenge when every smart guy like himself knows that he is just fooling innocent people when he eschews the referee-ing by a bilaterally accepted impartial body to oversee and judge the performance of anyone taking up the challenge.

In my part of the world all such and similar contests are overseed, referee-ed, and judged by impartial bodies like an internationally renowned auditing company, and must have the permit from the government, to ensure that there is a genuine level playing field all around.

[.....]


I have enjoyed our communication, but it now appears you have no actual interest in learning anything. This leaves me uncertain as to what has motivated you to spend the time and energy you have to 'examining' Buddhism. Regardless, I do not believe you and I have anything of benefit to offer each other at this time. Perhaps another time.

That is the tragedy of dialogue with people already committed to a world-view with their psychology already made up that it is the ultimate truth.

That is why they need to exercise censorship on themselves and on others who would exchange views with them in a critical manner.

If they are the owners of a web forum then they ban you as soon as they notice that you are disputing their Buddha, their Buddhism, and their life-style.

If they don't own the forum, they try to exert pressure on the powers there to eliminate you on grounds of hate speech against Buddhists or even just extremely cruel content in your messages.

Good for Buddhists, whatever their denial of the self, they still duck when they see a stone going toward their heads, but then they have to resort to all sorts of incredibly amazing verbal acrobatics to reconcile their ducking of their heads with their denial of the self.


Yrreg

 

[Dancing David]

That is the tragedy of dialogue with people already committed to a world-view with their psychology already made up that it is the ultimate truth.

And you seem to be bending the truth to read that into what user said. Even a mountain of dictionaries or 20 gigabytes of electronic dictionaries are going to allow you to parse that out of what user said. So it is straw, and more straw.

Maybe you should open a straw shop.

That is why they need to exercise censorship on themselves and on others who would exchange views with them in a critical manner.

More vaugeness not related to what usergoogle said. So a case of repeating the same old generalizations to all people.

I think Xians would have tossed you at the word go, but alas you won't preform that experiment. Substitute Xian for buddhists and replace the dogmatic bits. See how it flies with the Xians, I know you won't.

There is a Vast Buddhist Conspiracy oui to suppress the Great Wisdom of Yrreg despite it's Lack of Substance and Negative nature. Only Time Will Tell, will yrregians survive the VBC?
[/quote]

If they are the owners of a web forum then they ban you as soon as they notice that you are disputing their Buddha, their Buddhism, and their life-style.
[/quote]
No it was your rudeness or other stuff that got you banned, why don't you spam us with the details?
You have debated the doctines of the dharma endlessly here, no banning yet.

If they don't own the forum, they try to exert pressure on the powers there to eliminate you on grounds of hate speech against Buddhists or even just extremely cruel content in your messages.

Ah, I see did you pull that out of your beast of burden. So others recat to your rudenss, how suprising, what a shock!
[/quote]

Good for Buddhists, whatever their denial of the self, they still duck when they see a stone going toward their heads, but then they have to resort to all sorts of incredibly amazing verbal acrobatics to reconcile their ducking of their heads with their denial of the self.
[/quote]
nah, that is you , there is no soul, there is no transcendant self, there is only a transient self which changes momnet to moment.

Is a soul like god? Something that you feel needed by mankind , womenkind and animal =kind?

You are no sceptic.

J'accuse poseur. You feel a philosophy like buddhism would benefit from god.

Why should the soul matter?

Yrreg

 

[Loss Leader]

If they don't own the forum, they try to exert pressure on the powers there to eliminate you on grounds of hate speech against Buddhists or even just extremely cruel content in your messages.

You want some cheese to go with that whine?