Nonbelievers and Buddhism

[Dancing David]

10 minute break at work .....2 min. left. This basic experience of mindful breath is described by the AUM in Hinduism. Is it the same for Buddhism which also reveres the AUM...differently or the same? I don't know.

No reference for the aum in part because mindfullness has many practices, some mantras.

 

[Dancing David]

The Pali canon has much more than just Mara in it. Naga's are there, Devas, Buddha travels to heaven to see his dead mother and teaches various Indian deities. There are numerous accounts of miraculous events and abilities and there are also sections dealing with magical chants to protect from snake bites and other such things. Searching for 'deva' and pali text on google doesn't really cut it for doing a textual analysis of the contents of the Pali canon.

Sure, I appreciate that, it is the only source I have ready to hand, I am sure there is one at the library at the university. I agree it is full of some stuff. The bit about Mara lurking was the one I was aware of .

Traditional accounts of the Buddha have him coming from a non-Brahman background. There is some debate over whether the caste system is likely to have been in effect in his area but his family seem to have been closer to the 'warrior' ksatriya class than anything else.

That makes sense, I stand corrected. I am not sure how old the caste system was anyway.

As far as opposing the brahman traditions that is true but he wasn't the only one. There were a whole bunch of groups which rejected the Vedas and Brahmanic authority called the 'sramana' movements, Buddhism was one and so was Jainism but there were a whole bunch including 'hedonists'.

I agree, very diverse at the time.

The traditional tale of why he permitted women to enter the sangha was because of repeated requests from his disciple Ananda, not his mother?

I don't remember where I read about his mother and wife, it may have been in the Camus work, I don't remember.

 

[MikeSun5]

Well, hmmm, I wonder, does anybody on this thread about "nonbelievers and Buddhism" actually have any experiences which relate to the thread that they would like to share?

Dude, let me explain something to you. Critical thinking and evidence based science are heavily promoted by the JREF, and in this forum anecdotal evidence is not accepted because anybody can make up anything and say whatever they want. Here, we demand proof for your claims.

I can tell you that I led a meditation session last night and we actually succeeded in liberating John the Baptist. You can't prove me wrong, can you? Does the fact you can't disprove me make my claim true? No. You can see why anecdotal evidence is looked down upon.

I can say "prayer and meditation have absolutely no effect on anyone besides the person engaging in the activity," because there is ample proof (ie: empirical evidence) for that statement. Here's some right here.

See the difference?

I mean, you can still say whatever you want, but when you make claims that are easily disproven, ignore word definitions, avoid damaging evidence, and only provide anecdotes to support your statements... well, good luck with that.

 

[Meadmaker]

Is it the same for Buddhism which also reveres the AUM...differently or the same?

No Buddhists I met, nor books I've read, ever mentioned the AUM.

 

[Ron_Tomkins]

What is the sound of one tree falling in a desert forest without anyone hearin.....

oh wait.... That came out wrong.

 

[MikeSun5]

It's also quite clear he was clearly advocating a very different kind of religious teaching so I'd say it would be more replacement than accommodation. In the end though Buddhism remained focused on the perennial Indian religious concern of 'escaping samsara' so maybe it wasn't completely innovative!

Really, I was trying to determine if the Buddha himself was aiming to form a philosophy or a religion - since Buddhism has been described as both. I suppose him having found a "truth" and teaching people about it could be interpreted as either him being a philosopher or a religious leader. Of course most "philosophers" don't have temples dotting the Asian landscape.

Belief is not the only measure that is used to determine religious affliation across the world.

I kind of want to explore this for a second... what ARE the measures by which we determine religious affiliation? I would guess belief and practice. Maybe others. Evangelism maybe?
According to many posts in this thread, Buddhism doesn't require a person to believe anything or practice the rituals to be identified as a Buddhist.

What measures (aside from simply liking an idea or three) determine affiliation with Buddhism?

 

[Augustus]

I think that the draw of Buddhism for most people is that it allows them to break with traditional Judeo-Christian thought without going to Paganism (which would be too weird for many of the) or Islam (which gets a bad rap due to the insanity of some of its followers). It's also more prominent than say, Taoism, and less difficult to comprehend than Hinduism.

I think that, for some, it's a step between Christianity and non-religion. For others, it's just a catch-all term for them messing with Eastern philosophy that they don't really comprehend.

 

[NordaVinci]

Dude, let me explain something to you. Critical thinking and evidence based science are heavily promoted by the JREF, and in this forum anecdotal evidence is not accepted because anybody can make up anything and say whatever they want. Here, we demand proof for your claims.

I can tell you that I led a meditation session last night and we actually succeeded in liberating John the Baptist. You can't prove me wrong, can you? Does the fact you can't disprove me make my claim true? No. You can see why anecdotal evidence is looked down upon.

I can say "prayer and meditation have absolutely no effect on anyone besides the person engaging in the activity," because there is ample proof (ie: empirical evidence) for that statement. Here's some right here.

See the difference?

I mean, you can still say whatever you want, but when you make claims that are easily disproven, ignore word definitions, avoid damaging evidence, and only provide anecdotes to support your statements... well, good luck with that.

But of course this is exactly why I decided to check out the forum dude. Empirical, anecdotal, heuristic, etc are also in my vocabulary, and of course I am well aware that when I share an experience that it must be taken as anecdotal even if it's on video and even if it's taken as historical fact.

I looked at the link about the pray study:

1) Three churches were asked to pray for everybody on a list and include the phrase "(paraphrased)Get Better."

2) And that "didn't work"....the sick people didn't get better any quicker.

Comment About Praying for Sick People:
(Another true story..Feel free to check it out for yourself.)

Rev. Moon was in Danbury Conn. prison with Bill Shepherd. Bill was a very good Christian who had never even gotten a parking ticket. He worked for a company that somehow was accused of something and he was accused of something...and convicted, and sentenced to jail for 10 years. He was very resentful.

Rev. Moon saw this and explained to Bill the following: When your wife was pregnant and in the hospital and gave birth to your daughter, who was born with multiple life threatening birth defects. Your daughter was destined to die to pay indemnity for the past sins in your lineages. But you and your wife got down on your knees and prayed the whole night for God to do a miracle such that your daughter could live...and God listened to your prayer and healed your daughter completely.....However, the indemnity that your daughter would have paid was now shifted to you. You were falsely accused and sent to prison. If you have a grateful attitude, then you will probably not serve the full sentence and your daughter will remain healthy. But if you have resentment, then you will serve the full 10 years and your daughter might develop health problems again.

See the difference.....in level and intensity of prayer....

There are many, many such true stories....want to here another one?

 

[iknownothing]

Your daughter was destined to die to pay indemnity for the past sins in your lineages.

Oh, my word. You believe this crap is wisdom? This is the same thing that has been used to blame the victim all over the world throughout history.

Is your point here to turn people solidly against your beliefs? Because that little story was repugnant.

 

[NordaVinci]

[Meadmaker said:] No Buddhists I met, nor books I've read, ever mentioned the AUM.

Check out wikipedia's brief...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aum#In_Buddhism

In Buddhism

Buddhists place om at the beginning of their Vidya-Sadaksari or mystical formulary in six syllables (viz., om mani padme hum) as well as most other mantras and dharanis. As a seed syllable (bija mantra), it is also considered holy in Esoteric Buddhism.

The syllable is often written with the Chinese character 唵 (pinyin ǎn) or 嗡 (pinyin wēng) in Buddhist texts of East Asian provenience.

 

[NordaVinci]

Dude, let me explain something to you. Critical thinking and evidence based science are heavily promoted by the JREF, and in this forum anecdotal evidence is not accepted because anybody can make up anything and say whatever they want. Here, we demand proof for your claims.

I can tell you that I led a meditation session last night and we actually succeeded in liberating John the Baptist. You can't prove me wrong, can you? Does the fact you can't disprove me make my claim true? No. You can see why anecdotal evidence is looked down upon.

I can say "prayer and meditation have absolutely no effect on anyone besides the person engaging in the activity," because there is ample proof (ie: empirical evidence) for that statement. Here's some right here.

See the difference?

I mean, you can still say whatever you want, but when you make claims that are easily disproven, ignore word definitions, avoid damaging evidence, and only provide anecdotes to support your statements... well, good luck with that.

Oh, my word. You believe this crap is wisdom? This is the same thing that has been used to blame the victim all over the world throughout history.

Is your point here to turn people solidly against your beliefs? Because that little story was repugnant.

The point is I am relating a true, factual account:

1) Rev. Moon and Bill Shepherd, the wife and the daughter are real.
2) The daughter was born with with no chance of survival.
3) The Shepherds prayed that way.
4) The daughter was completely healed in the morning
5) Rev. Moon's explanation was as stated.
6) Bill Shepherd listened and believed it and became a disciple of Rev. Moon in prison.
7) Buddhist belief says that things that come to me are for me. My restorational karma has drawn it out of the woodwork for my benefit.
8) Rev. Moon can be seen by Buddhists as having taught Bill about a principle of Buddhism in terms that Bill, as a Christian, would understand.

 

[NordaVinci]

hmmm I should've previewed that last one before sending it. It should be like this:

[NordaVinci quoted Rev. Moon as saying to Bill Shepherd in prison]

"Your daughter was destined to die to pay indemnity for the past sins in your lineages."

[iknownothing replied:]

Oh, my word. You believe this crap is wisdom? This is the same thing that has been used to blame the victim all over the world throughout history.

Is your point here to turn people solidly against your beliefs? Because that little story was repugnant.

[NordaVinci's reply;]

The point is I am relating a true, factual account:

1) Rev. Moon and Bill Shepherd, the wife and the daughter are real.
2) The daughter was born with with no chance of survival.
3) The Shepherds prayed that way.
4) The daughter was completely healed in the morning
5) Rev. Moon's explanation was as stated.
6) Bill Shepherd listened and believed it and became a disciple of Rev. Moon in prison.
7) Buddhist belief says that things that come to me are for me. My restorational karma has drawn it out of the woodwork for my benefit.
8) Rev. Moon can be seen by Buddhists as having taught Bill about a principle of Buddhism in terms that Bill, as a Christian, would understand.

 

[NordaVinci]

[Meadmaker said:] No Buddhists I met, nor books I've read, ever mentioned the AUM.

Check out wikipedia's brief...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aum#In_Buddhism

In Buddhism

Buddhists place om at the beginning of their Vidya-Sadaksari or mystical formulary in six syllables (viz., om mani padme hum) as well as most other mantras and dharanis. As a seed syllable (bija mantra), it is also considered holy in Esoteric Buddhism.

The syllable is often written with the Chinese character 唵 (pinyin ǎn) or 嗡 (pinyin wēng) in Buddhist texts of East Asian provenience.

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bija

n Hinduism and Buddhism, the Sanskrit term bīja (Jp. 種子 shuji), literally seed, is used as a metaphor for the origin or cause of things and cognate with bindu.

The Om bija in Esoteric Buddhism[Picture]

The metaphor is considerably extended in the Consciousness-only teachings of the Yogacara school of Buddhism. According to this theory, all experiences and actions produce bīja as impressions, stored in the alaya (storehouse) consciousness. The external world is produced when the seeds "perfume" this consciousness. This view of bīja has been equated to memes, with the theory itself positing an extreme form of memetics (i.e. reality and existence consist purely of memes).

In Vajrayana Buddhism and Hinduism, the term bīja is used for mystical "seed syllables" contained within mantras. These seeds do not have precise meanings, but are thought to carry connections to spiritual principles. The best-known bīja syllable is Om, first found in the Hindu scriptures the Upanishads.

 

[NordaVinci]

PS
at...The best-known bīja syllable is Om, first found in the Hindu scriptures the Upanishads.

That would be the shortest and most quantum mechanical of the Upanishads...the Mandukya.

Explaining superposition of states..etc.

 

[NordaVinci]

PS Read three or four good translations of the Mandukya...It's only about 12 stanzas long, and is certainly available on the internet.

 

[NordaVinci]

Then we might be able to comment on my esoteric slideshow at Flickr.com, which the second half of diagrammatically and comparitive religiously explores the OM. Several people (professor types) told me 12 years ago that I had enough material to write three books..and one said that if I didn't hurry up, he was going to do it himself......So if anybody provides interesting insights, I'll reference you in my upcoming series of books...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/nordavinci/sets/72157612794700849/show/

 

[Complexity]

You've just got to love these proselytizers.

What's that? We don't anymore?

I must not have gotten that memo.

NordaVinci - all of this has been done many times before and usually much better. All to no effect. Most haven't been Moonies, but you truly are interchangable, so that doesn't matter.

Stick around and have some fun, but please drop the drivel.

 

[NordaVinci]

Because Buddhism has many experiential elements (such as chanting beginning with OM)....and since this is Randi.org, firmly grounded in scientific rigor...


Scientific context of "Anecdotal"

In science, anecdotal evidence has been defined as:

* "information that is not based on facts or careful study"[2][verification needed]
* "non-scientific observations or studies, which do not provide proof but may assist research efforts"[3]
* "reports or observations of usually unscientific observers"[4]
* "casual observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis"[5]
* "information passed along by word-of-mouth but not documented scientifically"

Anecdotal evidence can have varying degrees of formality. For instance, in medicine, published anecdotal evidence is called a case report, which is a more formalized type of evidence subjected to peer review.[6] Although such evidence is not regarded as scientific, it is sometimes regarded as an invitation to more rigorous scientific study of the phenomenon in question.[7] For instance, one study found that 35 of 47 anecdotal reports of side effects were later sustained as "clearly correct."[8]

Researchers may use anecdotal evidence for suggesting new hypotheses, but never as supporting evidence.

 

[NordaVinci]

That was from wikipedia..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

 

[Meadmaker]

Buddhists place om at the beginning of their Vidya-Sadaksari or mystical formulary in six syllables (viz., om mani padme hum) as well as most other mantras and dharanis. As a seed syllable (bija mantra), it is also considered holy in Esoteric Buddhism.

No Buddhists I've ever met, or books I've ever read, mentioned it.

I have heard the phrase "om mani padme hum", but I don't actually know where I heard it, or what it means. It's not something we said at the Zen Center. I think I remember seeing it in a movie, perhaps in "The Little Buddha" (which I did not think was a good movie) or "Seven Years in Tibet" (which I liked better).

ETA: I hasten to add that just because I've never heard it does not mean people don't say it, or even that it is some sort of fringe ritual. I really have no idea. My point is that it there's a lot of different sorts of Buddhists, and this particular bit of ritual/belief/wooish practice is just no part of every Buddhist's experience. It is possible to be a Buddhist and not even be familiar with OM, or any derivative thereof.