Buddhism cannot be discussed openly?
-
I am asking you to think those questions because you seem like a person quick to judge.... I basically do not agree with the answer you have posted above but then so what? who am I right?Originally posted by paperflower:in relationship there are activities which has nice good ones & bad unpleasant ones. be it in relationship or any activities involved in daily life, when the self is not at peace, calm and cleared, nothing beneficial can genuinely be accomplished.
cause & effect can be over a time frame of NOW or later on. you could do some "obvious" experiments yourself to personally learn about this cause & effects. whether the effect is immediate or later on, it is still an effect from a cause which is always evolving.... and it is not something ultimate we expecting but it is the nature of it when time ripens.
as for taming.... i'm sure by now you should be able to understand how to go about doing that if you start practicing. a child, like all of us need guidances and it is possible for anyone to be tamed in the most chaotic sufferings. thats when you use wisdom method to apply the teachings, someone there patiently guiding.... and where does all these come from? ... the mind.
and yes the child is possible to become tamed if you stop him/her from suffering. but it is not you stopped his/her suffering, it is you guided him/her to stop the suffering which he/she has to do it personally, even a child. and it is possible. there are many strong willed-power people around even in children too which i personally witness myself and went through when i was a kid. (it is not entirely about "stop" immediately but to ligthen and gradually disassociate and free from sufferings).
when a child is not tamed even when not in sufferings it is just like our mind still wandering about wildly and coming to many thoughts of action. so guidance is needed to consistently remind and train this mind. a parent, a teacher, a friend or someone reliable is important for such support and most importantly for a mature mind is still the oneself. -
Originally posted by casino_king:I am asking you to think those questions because you seem like a person quick to judge.... I basically do not agree with the answer you have posted above but then so what? who am I right?
likewise same for me - i do not care if you read them or agree with them entirely. -
I thought you might say that. Cheers.Originally posted by paperflower: likewise same for me - i do not care if you read them or agree with them entirely. -
The methods used to gain insights in the spiritual world is not by what we understand as (Modern) Scientific Method, because our mundane world's knowledge of the Science does NOT include dealing with spirituality - but of the material world. The Scientists know little about the nature of consciousness, so little that they can neither refute nor assert anything regarding it. So far they have not disproven anything taught by Buddha. The studies done have positive results. In fact I have already given you quite a couple of URLs in the previous post - have you read them?
But no matter how much studies and research - is it able to convince people from other faiths? Especially in the field of 'Spirituality'. Maybe not. Many ppl, including Atheists, or from other Faiths, will have trouble accepting these truths (i.e Darwin's theory of evolution?). That is because of their dogmatism, lack of open mindedness. Prove is already out there - but if you are dogmatic, you will never be able to accept it. The ultimate proof that will clear ALL doubts, not even single one remaining, is through Enlightenment itself. Prior to that it is still OK to have doubts, as long as your doubt does not become a Fetter and Obstruction to your path.
You mentioned that if Buddhism can get rid of 'fantastic' and 'superstitious' claims, then Buddhism will have a bright future. But in fact it is NEITHER fantastic nor superstitious, both are only our own unenlightened perceptions. As I have already given you this analogy many times, 400 years ago if you were to tell people the world is round, people will think you are mad and superstitious. That is why I stressed in the previous topic to go beyond conventional logic and understanding. To see for yourself. Imagine you are Buddha, but you lived in Modern times where nobody knew anything about rebirth. And in your meditation you recalled your past life. Will you tell the truth to others? That is an interesting question - in fact, Buddha DID himself ask this question 2500 years ago. Initially he did not teach the dharma, because he thought the truths (the essence of Buddhadharma) he has comprehended will be too difficult for people to understand/realise. It was later due to invitation that he actually taught. He decided that whether people will believe or not, accept it, practise it, become enlightened, he has to try his best to bring the teachings to the world and benefit as many people as possible. Just because science does not have a lot of evidence (there is some good evidence already - and so far nothing that can disprove rebirth), we should NOT denounce something we do not know as Superstition and Fantasy - otherwise we will be like those people 400 years ago who believe in a Flat Earth. And I have also mentioned for example things like past life, one can actually RECALL for themselves - and a couple of guys in our forum has actually did that. They did recall their past life with clarity, but I am not sure if they want to share their experiences now. A lot of these has been discussed in the previous topic so I shall not repeat again.
Even if a person did research in it, many people will criticise him/etc. And as far as I can see there is not many ppl out there willing to proof these kind of things (scientists wld be more willing to do something that has more immediate effects - i.e inventing stuff, medicines, etc), and especially since Buddhists arent too concerned about getting converts and evangelism - unlike monotheistic religions. Although more and more science will back up the teachings of Buddhism in time to come - as it has already done, there is actually NO POINT in us to prove this using what we know as Modern Scientific Method (Buddhism is in fact the FIRST to come up with this kind of science, what else can be compared to Buddhism? Lots of things taught by Buddha are only discovered recently) - people will in time realise for themselves because Buddhism is not about Beliefs, it is about Self-Realisation, Self-Conquest, Self-Liberation - and also generating Compassion and Loving Kindness to all. A Buddhist who practises meditation will in due time realise the truths Buddha taught - there is no need for blind faith. Buddhism does not require blind faith in an external being for salvation at all. Actually Buddhism cannot be considered a religion for many reasons - but that I shall not discuss now. Buddha's reason for people to practise the dharma is very logical without any dogmas. Buddha deals with a very common and real problem among humanity, he deals with our core delusion that binds us to Dukkha, and never seeing True Bliss. Anyone who has had enough sufferings in life will turn to Buddhism to seek truths - and it always works. Of course those who did not have sufferings, may also be attracted to Buddhism, because Dukkha is not only in pain and suffering, Dukkha (Suffering) also includes the positive aspect. As long as we remain unconscious/unaware, there is dukkha. Psychotherapists has tried to learn to incorporate Buddhist methods and teachings, but nothing can be compared to Buddhism itself. I also agree with Cenarious, perhaps you should grab a copy of - The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle. It is not a Buddhist book in fact, it is written by a mystic who underwent a spiritual realisation/transformation, but he is not a Buddhist. But the book does contain valuable insights.
There was a person during Buddha's time, or a story spoken by Buddha. He was shot by poisonous arrow and was about to die. But he was stubborn and DEMANDS to know who shot him? He stubbornly refused to receive treatment from the Physician who could have cured him, and because of that, he died. The human conditioning is the same - the Buddhas are in fact prescribing us the Dharmas to cure us from our mental afflictions, but if we are stubbornly clinging to scepticisms, refuse to drop our dogmatism, then we will never find back our true nature and lasting happiness. Buddha does not demand your fervent belief in him as a divine being. He imparts us with the knowledge of all that he knew, the systematic methods (i.e Eight fold path) that will lead us to Enlightenment, but it is up to us whether to cultivate. Uncountable people have already seen the benefits and attained realisations of the buddhadharma - including as I said, many in our forum who are already highly enlightened.
Buddhism is like a kind of science, although it deals with a different field of things with different approach to seeking truths. Why do I say scientific? Because Buddha's way of teaching is scientific. Even when compared to other systems of Mystic contemplative systems like Christian Mysticism, Islamic Sufism, Hindu, Taoism, New Age etc - no other religions had that kind of 'scientific' approach. Other mystical traditions tend to personify their mystical realisations/experiences of divinity/pure consciousness (i.e Christ within - union with God), and in terms of clarity falls still fall short of Buddha's level of understanding - although what they realised is also not different Buddhism, it is a stage whereby a contemplative will have to go through. Buddhism also provides a Systematic way of experiencing reality. What I meant by systematic and scientific - for example, in modern science, we will say: Given any event E1, there is an Event E2 that follows E1 after time interval T1, we can say that E1 is the cause of E2.... the causality aspect, this is, that is.. this exists, that exists. Now, compare it with Buddhism - the teaching that started more than 2500 years ago. We learn about the 12 Links of Interdependant Origination, etc. By 'reversing' and eliminating the Interdependant Origination Links of Origination one may again arrive at the point where there is no more trace of ignorance. Buddha's method of teaching is very systematic throughout. It also ensures no confusion among practitioners and that everyone will be able to arrive at the same grounds at the end of their path.
Samsara is like a sickness; the Buddha, who was called the Great Physician,
offers a cure; but the patient must recognize the illness, with its causes, its symptoms, and its effects, before the cure can begin. - 12 Links of Interdependant Origination -
(continued from previous post - segmented to prevent expiry)
And so, there is definitely a reason why Albert Einstein said these -"Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural & spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity"
Of course, Science is beginning to discover more in the fields of Quantum Physics - if you come across The Universe in a Single Atom by Dalai Lama, you may wish to get it. On the other hand, a person who tries the 'Buddhist Scientific Method' that is the Meditative way, will surely get the same results as the Buddha, the enlightened one. After all uncountable ppl in the world had already tried and done that.
-- Albert Einstein [1954, from Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press]
"The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. The religion which is based on experience, which refuses dogmatism. If there's any religion that would cope the scientific needs it will be BuddhismÂ…"
-- Albert Einstein
-----
Just realised that the 12 interdependant link of origination URL I posted (i just did a quick random search on google but havent looked through the webpage originally) -, http://www.pcddallas.org/The_12_Links_of_Interdependent_Origination.htm is truly worthy reading. -
If you stick with pirituality on a personal basis... there is no problem. Religious people tends to go overboard and encroach on physics... ability to fly around with your legs crossed.... walk on water.... but fail to provide any evidence of that.
I am really tired of contributing on this... why don't you go back and read all those sites you gave me and see where it encroaches on physics and remove it when there are no evidence to support it.
What you are left with will be the essence of waht you are believing that might make an iota of sense... you will then have a better understanding of yourself and your religion and what it is that you are trying to do by suscribing to your religion. It is pointless to tell me that yours is not a religion.... just do as I suggest and you will advance to a higher level. -
Originally posted by casino_king:
got to look at the mirror, who's the one giving the excuses of not investigating the 'scientific' claims.
This is what I mean by having lots of excuses.
/\ -
When I say "evidence" and i say "scientific" of course I do not mean any old "evidence" and any so called "scientific" will do.Originally posted by sinweiy:got to look at the mirror, who's the one giving the excuses of not investigating the 'scientific' claims.
/\
If it is anything less than the universally accepted standard then anybody came come up and make any claims.... does not matter how interesting the claims are, you just cannot accept it. Matrix the movie is pretty interesting... Back to the future is pretty interesting... John Travolta's Angel is pretty interesting...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method -
pls, to protect other religions, i think only Buddhists & maybe hinduism say possible, that it's part of human ability to see past lifes, telescopic sighting, phonic hearing, read other's mind, to name a few...but never have we said we need them as it will directly obstruct one's spiritual progress.Originally posted by casino_king:If you stick with pirituality on a personal basis... there is no problem. Religious people tends to go overboard and encroach on physics... ability to fly around with your legs crossed.... walk on water.... but fail to provide any evidence of that.
I am really tired of contributing on this... why don't you go back and read all those sites you gave me and see where it encroaches on physics and remove it when there are no evidence to support it.
What you are left with will be the essence of waht you are believing that might make an iota of sense... you will then have a better understanding of yourself and your religion and what it is that you are trying to do by suscribing to your religion. It is pointless to tell me that yours is not a religion.... just do as I suggest and you will advance to a higher level.
such evidence only apply for scientists and world's people not for Buddhism.
If a wicked man can become a pure religious man, this according to Buddhism, is a practical miracle.
http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Clubs/buddhism/dhammananda/31.htm
/\ -
this is judging the book by it's cover is yet another excuse.Originally posted by casino_king:When I say "evidence" and i say "scientific" of course I do not mean any old "evidence" and any so called "scientific" will do.
If it is anything less than the universally accepted standard then anybody came come up and make any claims.... does not matter how interesting the claims are, you just cannot accept it. Matrix the movie is pretty interesting... Back to the future is pretty interesting... John Travolta's Angel is pretty interesting...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
/\ -
Originally posted by sinweiy:
You are making unsubstatiated claims here... I am not saying that you are lying or that it is not true... but when you do not not have the evidence to back it up then you must not make such claims... it goes straight to the credibility of the religion.
pls, to protect other religions, i think only Buddhists & maybe hinduism say possible, that it's part of human ability to see past lifes, telescopic sighting, phonic hearing, read other's mind, to name a few...but never have we said we need them as it will directly obstruct one's spiritual progress.
[b] such evidence only apply for scientists and world's people not for Buddhism.
/\
[/b] -
Originally posted by casino_king:
no it wouldn't, as we already stressed that Buddha never encourage them, as it will jeopardize our spiritual progress. and since our 'technology' is no there yet. better still that we can concentrate on the progression itself. got evidence is of coz better, but it's no necessary. keep that in mind.
You are making unsubstatiated claims here... I am not saying that you are lying or that it is not true... but when you do not not have the evidence to back it up then you must not make such claims... it goes straight to the credibility of the religion.
/\ -
OK let's say we accept that all these fantastic calims play very little part in "real" Buddhist traditions and all those rituals and chantings by Buddhist monks at funerals are just for fun...... so what do we have? Can you summerise it for us?Originally posted by sinweiy:no it wouldn't, as we already stressed that Buddha never encourage them, as it will jeopardize our spiritual progress. and since our 'technology' is no there yet. better still that we can concentrate on the progression itself. got evidence is of coz better, but it's no necessary. keep that in mind.
/\ -
(Modern) Scientific Method has worked really well in advancing human knowledge over the years... You claim that Buddhism is "scientific" well none of the modern advancement in science and technology and none of the advancement in medicine came from Buddhism, if I am not wrong.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:The methods used to gain insights in the spiritual world is not by what we understand as (Modern) Scientific Method, because our mundane world's knowledge of the Science does NOT include dealing with spirituality - but of the material world. The Scientists know little about the nature of consciousness, so little that they can neither refute nor assert anything regarding it. So far they have not disproven anything taught by Buddha. The studies done have positive results. In fact I have already given you quite a couple of URLs in the previous post - have you read them?
What does that tell you?
If you want me to give up the (Modern) Scientific Method as a principle to guide my own life, then you have to give me something superior.
I note that you say "Science does NOT include dealing with spirituality. "
This implies that there is a place for Buddhism (let's leave the others out of it for the time being.)
Well I will have you know that as far as science is concern, there is no evidence for the "spirit." So if there is no evidence for the spirit, then there is so such thing as spirituality.
Before we go on, please define "spirit." Then define "spirituality. "
Please do it for yourself because I know that there is no evidence for spirit and so as far as I am concern, any notion of spirit must be assumed to be in the realm of "fantasy." Fantasy as in something that is in people's head but where there is no evidence for. Not necessarily bad "bad" but cannot be considered because there is no evidence of it's existence.
Just like, even though there might be an alien race out there somewhere in outer space who will come to earth to rescue us from our mortality, I will not give it any consideration as I go about my daily life because there is no evidence of that.
So back to you before I go on. -
Originally posted by casino_king:
that's not knowing the significant of rituals and chantings , hence judge the book by the cover saying it's 'for fun'.
.. and all those rituals and chantings by Buddhist monks at funerals are just for fun...... so what do we have? Can you summerise it for us?
Might want to ask our president S. R. Nathan, who once said to my master that he like one think about Buddhism. It's emphasizing on the significance(good person) than on the apparent (ritual).
http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Clubs/buddhism/dhammananda/175.htm
As practised in many Buddhist countries, a real Buddhist funeral is a simple, solemn and dignified ceremony. Unfortunately, some people have included many unnecessary, extraneous items and superstitious practices into the funeral rites. The extraneous items and practices vary according to the traditions and customs of the people. They were introduced in olden days by people who probably could not understand the nature of life, nature of death, and what life would be after death. When such ideas were incorporated into Buddhist practices, people tended to blame Buddhism for expensive funeral rites. If only the Buddhist public would approach proper persons who have studied the real Teachings of the Buddha and Buddhist tradition, they could receive advice on how to perform Buddhist funeral rites. It is most unfortunate that a bad impression has been created that Buddhism encourages people to waste their money and time on unnecessary practices. It must be clearly understood that Buddhism has nothing to do with such debased practices.
Rites and Rituals
These are included within customs and traditions. The rites and rituals are an ornamentation or a decoration to beautify a religion in order to attract the public. They provide a psychological help to some people. But one can practise religion without any rites and rituals. Certain rites and rituals that people consider as the most important aspect of their religion for their salvation are not considered as such in Buddhism. According to the Buddha, one should not cling to such practices for his spiritual development or mental purity.
http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Clubs/buddhism/dhammananda/225.htm
/\ -
You just confirmed that it is for "fun" isn't it? No significance, just for "show" to attract people.Originally posted by sinweiy:that's not knowing the significant of rituals and chantings , hence judge the book by the cover saying it's 'for fun'.
Might want to ask our president S. R. Nathan, who once said to my master that he like one think about Buddhism. It's emphasizing on the significance(good person) than on the apparent (ritual).
/\ -
Hi casino king,
I been wondering why you don't believe in the buddhism teaching and at the same time keep coming in to ask people giving you evidence.
Is it because you begin to have doubt on the old thinking that you been having? and hence come to buddhism forum expecting people to tell you "yeah, yeah buddhism is not right"
There are really a lot of article, documentary about karma, reincarnation even newspaper photos of meditators who float in the air.
If you are after the phsychic power, I think you can forget it.
But if you want some info so that you can fully believe in buddhism, you really have to go and google it yourself. especially look for those articles by western scientist on why they turn buddhism.
The forummers here already tell you so much, I even doubt if their compassion to you is worth it. -
Now I am beginning to think that if I can believe you, Buddhism is similar to Hinduism in that Hinduism claims that the Hindu temples are for the "seekers" who does not know any better and need statues to pray to and "stories" to believe in.
Thus Buddhist temples with the statues of Buddha are meaningless but there for the "seekers" to worship.... and the funeral rituals and chanting for "show." -
alamak? this is a forum is it not? or am I wrong? is this some sort of newspaper? or is this a place for discussion? or is this a place to discuss only about sex? please lah this is a forum for people discuss issues that they are interested in.... I am interested in religion... not just Buddhism.Originally posted by justdoit77:Hi casino king,
I been wondering why you don't believe in the buddhism teaching and at the same time keep coming in to ask people giving you evidence.
Is it because you begin to have doubt on the old thinking that you been having? and hence come to buddhism forum expecting people to tell you "yeah, yeah buddhism is not right"
There are really a lot of article, documentary about karma, reincarnation even newspaper photos of meditators who float in the air.
If you are after the phsychic power, I think you can forget it.
But if you want some info so that you can fully believe in buddhism, you really have to go and google it yourself. especially look for those articles by western scientist on why they turn buddhism.
The forummers here already tell you so much, I even doubt if their compassion to you is worth it.
I want to know why people "believe" and so I launch a discussion. If they have things to say and I have thigs to say, then we continue.... if not we stop, no harm done... the objective of having a forum is achieved.
OK why are YOU a Buddhist? -
Originally posted by casino_king:
see judge the book by cover again.
You just confirmed that it is for "fun" isn't it? No significance, just for "show" to attract people.
u must differential those who mixed folk believe from real buddhists.
"They provide a psychological help to some people. But one can practise religion without any rites and rituals. "
regarding chanting, u do physical exercise or not? chanting is also a form of mediation. a mental exercise.8. Right Meditation
it's best that youngster nowaday do Meditation, than cause a lot of troubles outside.
Meditation means the gradual process of training the mind to focus on a single object and to remain fixed upon the object without wavering. The constant practice of meditation helps one to develop a calm and concentrated mind and help to prepare one for the attainment of Wisdom and Enlightenment ultimately.
keep them occupy is one advantage.
/\ -
I would think that meditation is helpful as there is research done on meditation and found that it helps the human mind.Originally posted by sinweiy:it's best that youngster nowaday do Meditation, than cause a lot of troubles outside.
keep them occupy is one advantage.
/\
Specifically, meditation helps the mind to learn concentration and when it comes to activities where concentration is required, like studying, then students who learnt meditation made statistically significant improvements.
If Buddhism stops there, then there is no problem. Buddhism then goes on to say that meditation will bring you into a state of "samadhi" and all sorts of what can be described as supernatural happenings take place.
Not acceptable without evidence. -
Originally posted by casino_king:
I had - in the previous topic. A buddhist does not however, dwell on such things.
[b]If you stick with pirituality on a personal basis... there is no problem. Religious people tends to go overboard and encroach on physics... ability to fly around with your legs crossed.... walk on water.... but fail to provide any evidence of that.
See: amazing abilities by concentration - not a Buddhist website, but more towards Hinduism and hindu meditative techniques - as Buddhists generally do not promote developing such abilities. But the website provides valuable insights. -
You also asked in the previous topic:
When you are talking about levitating, you are talking about how gravity does not apply. It is not a question of assumption or logic.
To which I replied:
When i said that scientist are beginning to find meditation interesting and beneficial, I and the scientists are not talking about levitating. They are just pointing out that if you learn to concentrate your mind through practising mediation, you will improve your ability to concentrate and that is beneficial for learning and to do many types of work.
You said that paranormal activities are not importamnt to Buddhist teachings. I am of the opinion that if Buddhist can have the illusion that they can levitate through meditation, how much of Buddhist teachings are then based on such illusions?
While I admire Christian teachings I ask myself that if they can believe in God and heaven and hell; how much of Christian teaching is nonsense?
If you have read my previous post on 'amazing abilities by concentration', you would already have read the answer.
If such accounts of human levitation are true, then what enables a human being to counter the force of gravity and levitate? It defies Western logic. Perhaps the physical universe is not a physical universe at all. Perhaps it is just a play of our own conscious thinking, limited by our own consciousness. Perhaps by shifting our conscious awareness to the subtle more powerful regions of the mind we can transcend the limitations that we have at the more concrete expressions of consciousness that we call physical matter.
Quantum mechanics, an aspect of modern physics, identifies a field of life called the unified field, or ground state, which is the fundamental nonchanging field of life. It is eternal, unbounded, beyond space and time, wherein are contained all possibilities. It is the unmanifested field of pure potentiality from where all force and matter fields emerge. If you have this you have everything. Some physicists early on have postulated that this unmanifested field of pure potentiality may be consciousness itself. Max Planck stated, "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness." And Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington said, "All through the physical world runs the unknown content that must surely be the stuff of our consciousness."
Renowned Harvard graduate and physicist, Dr. John Hagelin, is spearheading the cutting edge of the recent discovery that a unified field of consciousness is indeed at the foundation of all conscious experience. He argues that consciousness is fundamental in nature; the lively origin and basis of everything in creation and not merely the result of biochemical processes in the brain. Dr. Hagelin identifies numerous parallels between the qualities of the single unified field sought by Einstein and the qualities of consciousness. He argues that consciousness is the unified field.
This unified field of consciousness, that is the unified field of nature, is your own inner nature as well. It is your inner Being. It is from here that all impulses of creativity emerge. The reality of life, which was once shrouded in mysticism, is today being understood in terms of modern science. To better understand how consciousness constructs our reality, I highly recommend seeing the documentary-drama film, What the Bleep Do We Know!? For more information, please visit their website at What the BLEEP Do We Know!?
The unified field is the field of all possibilities because it is the home of all the laws of nature, the residence of the constitution of the universe. This is the level from which all of nature manifests and operates. And it does so according to its inherent constitution, the laws of nature that reside therein. This unified field of the universe has now been discovered to be the unified field of consciousness.
Because the unified field of consciousness is your own inner nature you need not look far to find it. It is easily experienced through the practice of deep meditation. All you need to do is to bring your awareness to the deep inner level of unified consciousness, and imbibe that status within your conscious awareness. Operating from that status you gain command and support of all the laws of nature. -
As I said, there cannot be 'universally accepted standards' especially when dealing with fields of Spirituality.Originally posted by casino_king:When I say "evidence" and i say "scientific" of course I do not mean any old "evidence" and any so called "scientific" will do.
If it is anything less than the universally accepted standard then anybody came come up and make any claims.... does not matter how interesting the claims are, you just cannot accept it. Matrix the movie is pretty interesting... Back to the future is pretty interesting... John Travolta's Angel is pretty interesting...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
You mentioned that if Buddhism can get rid of 'fantastic' and 'superstitious' claims, then Buddhism will have a bright future. But in fact it is NEITHER fantastic nor superstitious, both are only our own unenlightened perceptions. As I have already given you this analogy many times, 400 years ago if you were to tell people the world is round, people will think you are mad and superstitious. That is why I stressed in the previous topic to go beyond conventional logic and understanding. To see for yourself. Imagine you are Buddha, but you lived in Modern times where nobody knew anything about rebirth. And in your meditation you recalled your past life. Will you tell the truth to others? That is an interesting question - in fact, Buddha DID himself ask this question 2500 years ago. Initially he did not teach the dharma, because he thought the truths (the essence of Buddhadharma) he has comprehended will be too difficult for people to understand/realise. It was later due to invitation that he actually taught. He decided that whether people will believe or not, accept it, practise it, become enlightened, he has to try his best to bring the teachings to the world and benefit as many people as possible. Just because science does not have a lot of evidence (there is some good evidence already - and so far nothing that can disprove rebirth), we should NOT denounce something we do not know as Superstition and Fantasy - otherwise we will be like those people 400 years ago who believe in a Flat Earth. And I have also mentioned for example things like past life, one can actually RECALL for themselves - and a couple of guys in our forum has actually did that. They did recall their past life with clarity, but I am not sure if they want to share their experiences now. A lot of these has been discussed in the previous topic so I shall not repeat again.
Even if a person did research in it, many people will criticise him/etc. And as far as I can see there is not many ppl out there willing to proof these kind of things (scientists wld be more willing to do something that has more immediate effects - i.e inventing stuff, medicines, etc), and especially since Buddhists arent too concerned about getting converts and evangelism - unlike monotheistic religions. Although more and more science will back up the teachings of Buddhism in time to come - as it has already done, there is actually NO POINT in us to prove this using what we know as Modern Scientific Method (Buddhism is in fact the FIRST to come up with this kind of science, what else can be compared to Buddhism? Lots of things taught by Buddha are only discovered recently) - people will in time realise for themselves because Buddhism is not about Beliefs, it is about Self-Realisation, Self-Conquest, Self-Liberation - and also generating Compassion and Loving Kindness to all. A Buddhist who practises meditation will in due time realise the truths Buddha taught - there is no need for blind faith. Buddhism does not require blind faith in an external being for salvation at all. Actually Buddhism cannot be considered a religion for many reasons - but that I shall not discuss now. Buddha's reason for people to practise the dharma is very logical without any dogmas. Buddha deals with a very common and real problem among humanity, he deals with our core delusion that binds us to Dukkha, and never seeing True Bliss. Anyone who has had enough sufferings in life will turn to Buddhism to seek truths - and it always works. Of course those who did not have sufferings, may also be attracted to Buddhism, because Dukkha is not only in pain and suffering, Dukkha (Suffering) also includes the positive aspect. As long as we remain unconscious/unaware, there is dukkha. Psychotherapists has tried to learn to incorporate Buddhist methods and teachings, but nothing can be compared to Buddhism itself. I also agree with Cenarious, perhaps you should grab a copy of - The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle. It is not a Buddhist book in fact, it is written by a mystic who underwent a spiritual realisation/transformation, but he is not a Buddhist. But the book does contain valuable insights. -
Originally posted by casino_king:
Yes you're right. But it only deals with particular things, science does not have full understanding of spirituality so far. How fast it takes for more knowledge in the spiritual field also highly depends on which way the scientists are directing their effort towards. Also for 2500 years, Buddhists do not feel at all threatened by the development of Science, but in fact, do look forward to scientific developments. It does not at all contradict Buddhism. Science has proven many things the Buddha taught, although there is still limits to what science currently understands. Buddhism is perhaps the only religion fully compatible with science. Or perhaps it shouldn't have been called a religion in the first place.
[b]
(Modern) Scientific Method has worked really well in advancing human knowledge over the years...You claim that Buddhism is "scientific" well none of the modern advancement in science and technology and none of the advancement in medicine came from Buddhism, if I am not wrong.
As I said. Buddhism is not a science as for example Biology, Chemistry, Physics. It deals with our consciousness, the path of purification, it deals with spirituality. Biology, Chemistry, Physics, etc, does not help in this area. Technology certainly does not help in that - so don't confuse things.What does that tell you?
Modern Scientific Method does not guide people's life although it does help to improve people's quality of life. Like I said dont confuse different things together. They deal with different sort of things. You are like trying to use Biology to deal with Physics. Or chemistry to deal with Arts.
If you want me to give up the (Modern) Scientific Method as a principle to guide my own life, then you have to give me something superior.
Let me remind you of Thusness's posts:Hi Casino_King,
It is inadequate to use rational thought to understand spiritual matters. Logic is only that branch of philosophy that deals with reasoning. It does not deal with all types of thinking such as remembering (Recalling past life included), dreaming (Dream Yoga), day dreaming, neurosis, learning..etc. These other types of thinking are the job of psychology and parapsychology.
Although evidence is needed to serve as a base for inductive and deductive reasoning, full proof evidence to arrive at a certain conclusion is not necessary in logical analysis. In daily life, not all reasoning attempts to provide conclusive evidence for the truth of a given conclusion and more often than not, conclusive evidence cannot be produced. For pragmatic ground, we merely want the evidence we arrived at be 'well founded'.
As human, sleeping and dreaming took up pretty much percentage of our life. We are not just a rational being, to understand human, we have to deal with all these matters with spiritual issues included.I note that you say "Science does NOT include dealing with spirituality. "
What i meant by 'spirituality' isnt about 'spirit', but a deeper meaning:
This implies that there is a place for Buddhism (let's leave the others out of it for the time being.)
Well I will have you know that as far as science is concern, there is no evidence for the "spirit." So if there is no evidence for the spirit, then there is so such thing as spirituality.
Before we go on, please define "spirit." Then define "spirituality. "
Please do it for yourself because I know that there is no evidence for spirit and so as far as I am concern, any notion of spirit must be assumed to be in the realm of "fantasy." Fantasy as in something that is in people's head but where there is no evidence for. Not necessarily bad "bad" but cannot be considered because there is no evidence of it's existence.
Just like, even though there might be an alien race out there somewhere in outer space who will come to earth to rescue us from our mortality, I will not give it any consideration as I go about my daily life because there is no evidence of that.
So back to you before I go on.
By Thusness previously:Reply with Quote
Hi Casino_King,
‘Spiritual Matters’ is merely a term to denote paranormal phenomenon, it is not an assumption. However If I were to assert that ‘spiritual matters really exist’, then it is an assumption. I believe I have not done so. Similarly if anyone were to assert that “spiritual matters do not exist” then he/she immediately makes it an assumption. The fact is, paranormal phenomenons are neither proven nor disproved. Thus, we have to explore further. But which and what method of exploration should we adopt?
I have stated that mere logical analysis isn’t the correct approach -- “It is inadequate to use rational thought to understand spiritual matters”, I have given my reasons. If you disagree, you must, at least tell me why or how through inference or syllogism itself is sufficient to ‘understand’ spiritual matters. Or prove that -- “It is inadequate to use rational thought to understand spiritual matters” is an untrue statement through logic of syllogism. Otherwise it is only reasonable and logical to employ a different approach.
Till now I have not spoken anything about Buddhism. I certainly do not want to deviate too much from this forum but as what many forumers have pointed out, you might have to put in a little more effort towards understanding some of the main core concepts and teachings of Buddhism -- Buddhism certainly isn't what you have perceived it to be. Like you, I have made some studies and practices in other religions (add Taoism to your list), I still think Buddhism best.
Lastly I do see some of your points. You might want to look into how man is defined by symbols for your gambler case. Again what I am going to say next might not be soothing to your ears but Buddhism truly teaches us how to go beyond these symbols. In whatever case, reserve an open for a fruitful discussion. We might not reach any conclusion but without an open mind, any form of discussion will eventually prove futile.