Which organised religious movement doesn't has ego?
-
Originally posted by Chin Eng:why??? am I expected to defend my faith to my death?
That is unnecessary. Don't be an ultruistic fool.
I believe what I believe to be true.... I don't expect anyone else to....
ya, don't expect me to believe what you say is true.
no need to argue till kingdom come to prove who's right or wrong.
Wrong, you need to prove me wrong.
you believe, you believe.... you don't believe, you don't believe lor.
No such thing. Herzog said you must believe. Religion demand that!
at the end of the day, we are all victims of our own choices ---- religious or atheists... and at the end of THE day, we cannot come back to disprove or prove anything.
At end of day, you lock my thread. Then you come back and delete my posts. -
I can see you in CE's underpants: the hole purpose is for someone here to admit that Buddhism is an EGO religion.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Nope, more like organised jibbing on our part at AEN and his religion.
Nevertheless, I would like to state that it isn't intentional and it came through our individual conclusion.
No problem, to satisfy your EGO, I say Buddhism is also about EGO but it is not a religion. -
So as I have said to HZ, it all depends on who you are judging Buddhism with. Is it the teachings or is it the people?Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:I can see you in CE's underpants: the hole purpose is for someone here to admit that Buddhism is an EGO religion.
No problem, to satisfy your EGO, I say Buddhism is also about EGO but it is not a religion.
Obviously if you are going to judge based on the people, there are definitely going to be 'egotistic Buddhists'. Afterall, most of us are unenlightened yet.
Happy chatting.. will be away for the next week. -
Once again, is religion for people or is it the other way round?Originally posted by An Eternal Now:So as I have said to HZ, it all depends on who you are judging Buddhism with. Is it the teachings or is it the people?
Obviously if you are going to judge based on the people, there are definitely going to be 'egotistic Buddhists'. Afterall, most of us are unenlightened yet.
Happy chatting.. will be away for the next week.
Individuals will not influence society but a whole religious movement might, so as I said earlier about religious movement is akin to the religion itself. -
Who you trying to kid? AEN is trying to prove metaphysics is superior to physics. Pratitya-samutpada is always true? How would anyone conduct a physical experiment to prove it?Originally posted by sLeEpWaLkErInG: -
Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:
That is unnecessary. Don't be an ultruistic fool.
I've already said that it is unnecessary, so why act like a parrot?Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:
ya, don't expect me to believe what you say is true.
again, repeating after me.... because I'd said that I don't desire for anyone to believe what I believe.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:
Wrong, you need to prove me wrong.
Why the NEED? I have no such need. I don't have such insecurity. If you have such needs, it's your own problem. I am never interested in proving anyone right or wrong. Afterall you DID SAY that "don't expect me to believe what you say is true" so I don't really want to prove you wrong, because you'd not believe me even if I do.... Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:
No such thing. Herzog said you must believe. Religion demand that!
Religion demands that the individual need to believe, religion does not demand that the person who believe needed another person to believe in order for the first person to be saved.... you've gone out of point and totally confused yet again!Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:
At end of day, you lock my thread. Then you come back and delete my posts.
Yes, I will continue to do so when there is a need to do so. My prerogative. Are you happy? Have you found your nirvana? Do you have a persecution complext? -
Originally posted by Chin Eng:
He's far from prananirvana anyway.
Yes, I will continue to do so when there is a need to do so. My prerogative. Are you happy? Have you found your nirvana? Do you have a persecution complext?
[/b] -
TGE, you must have a very heavy axe to grind ... You are attacking CE personally, not his views. I thought CE's post is a very reasonable one especially coming from a Christian. Perhaps if there are more Christians with this view, there won't be so much negative publicity about the church.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Chin Eng:
why??? am I expected to defend my faith to my death?
That is unnecessary. Don't be an ultruistic fool.
I believe what I believe to be true.... I don't expect anyone else to....
ya, don't expect me to believe what you say is true.
no need to argue till kingdom come to prove who's right or wrong.
Wrong, you need to prove me wrong.
you believe, you believe.... you don't believe, you don't believe lor.
No such thing. Herzog said you must believe. Religion demand that!
at the end of the day, we are all victims of our own choices ---- religious or atheists... and at the end of THE day, we cannot come back to disprove or prove anything.
At end of day, you lock my thread. Then you come back and delete my posts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -
haahaha, attack with axe? you are beyond believe! I was being very sacrasstic to a bigot. And to another one here: you are no different.Originally posted by Beyond Religion:TGE, you must have a very heavy axe to grind ... You are attacking CE personally, not his views. I thought CE's post is a very reasonable one especially coming from a Christian. Perhaps if there are more Christians with this view, there won't be so much negative publicity about the church. -
Hmmm .... you are far from Enlightenment.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:He's far from prananirvana anyway. -
new words - ultruistic and sacrasstic...... from the very learned TheGoodEarth.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:haahaha, attack with axe? you are beyond believe! I was being very sacrasstic to a bigot. And to another one here: you are no different.
thanks a lot.... without you, i wouldn't even google for these words only to learn that they don't exist.
if you're going to say that you're misspelling the words on purpose then that is going to make you look even dumber.... -
actually rereading your answer to the five points make you look real bad. you weren't even trying to be, ahem, sacrasstic...Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:haahaha, attack with axe? you are beyond believe! I was being very sacrasstic to a bigot. And to another one here: you are no different.
First two answers were repeating my points almost to the exact meaning....
Answer 2 conflicts with answer 3.....
Answer 4 was a totally misinterpretation.....
and Answer 5.... well that's stating the obvious....
... so which part were you trying to be, ahem, sacrasstic...
you know.... the trick of being sarcastic, oops I mean sacrasstic is - the people reading the points MUST KNOW AND FEEL that you're being sacrasstic.... and not interpret like you're writing crap. -
Logically proven, the 4 noble truths are not always true(i.e a person who has lost his mind cannot suffer and thus his suffering cannot be relieved) and thus cannot be considered to be applicable to all. I have proven the reality of my logic with a simple example. Hence, ignorance is always bliss.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Buddhists do not quote half-truths, but truths that can be tested and realised by everyone.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:
It cannot be proven true nor false by physical experiments, so is it a half-truth?
There are no half-truths. There are Four Noble Truth. But if you don't think they are truth or noble, that is fine with me. I suffer nothing. -
Hmmm .... then I wish you Eternal Bliss. Btw, have you lobotomise your brain?Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Logically proven, the 4 noble truths are not always true(i.e a person who has lost his mind cannot suffer and thus his suffering cannot be relieved) and thus cannot be considered to be applicable to all. I have proven the reality of my logic with a simple example. Hence, ignorance is always bliss. -
I think that Dukha would more refer to the feeling of unsatisfactory that one encounters. When a person lost his mind, such unsatisfactory would still have happened. The main reason for Dukha to have exist is the very underlying principal of impermanance. And that the average Joe like you and I cannot live to accept the changes that occurring fast and unknowingly to us.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Logically proven, the 4 noble truths are not always true(i.e a person who has lost his mind cannot suffer and thus his suffering cannot be relieved) and thus cannot be considered to be applicable to all. I have proven the reality of my logic with a simple example. Hence, ignorance is always bliss.
So I'm not quite sure when you said 'his suffering cannot be relieved', when in the first place if anyone would have expressed some kind of uncomfortable to a change of state that he/she is going through, that would be Dukha taking place already. Of course to "a person who has lost is mind" his definition and experience of Dukha would have been very different from you and I; but that being said, it doesn't mean that Dukha is not happening. -
And HZ,
I will agree with you that it also appears to me that the organised religious movement nowadays are with ego.
However, whether did this ego issue arise in the various religions' founders, that I wouldn't have say it had or had not. It ended up being a very subjective question. It's as if asking who's side are you with.
Personally for me I think at the end of the day, as long as we are been true and genuine to ourselves, I think that is all that matters. Need not care too much of how those other movements or whatsoever people think lah.
The Buddha's words have been much misinterpretated nowadays also. But we can only do so much. As long as we are being grateful and share whatever we know generously, that will do fine.
If you are an aethist, I think lagi better, no one to 'report to' in the first place. A true free soul who can live up to be true and genuine to yourself! -
Actually, as Buddhist, we also have no one but ourselves to "report" to. We dont get 'judged' by some ...beings.Originally posted by yamizi:If you are an aethist, I think lagi better, no one to 'report to' in the first place. A true free soul who can live up to be true and genuine to yourself! -
Well if you have 'yourself' to report to, then that is someone too. A true buddhist has no one, not even him/herself to report to =)Originally posted by Beyond Religion:Actually, as Buddhist, we also have no one but ourselves to "report" to. We dont get 'judged' by some ...beings.
Be. -
I am very close to it, yet I do not see it...Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:Hmmm .... you are far from Enlightenment.In Buddhism, parinirvana (Sanskrit: परिनिर्वाण parinirv¨¡ṇa; Pali: परिनिब्बाण parinibb¨¡ṇa; Chinese: °ãÄù˜„, b¨ ni¨¨ p¨¢n) is the final nirvana, usually understood to be within reach only upon the death of the body of someone who has attained complete awakening (bodhi). It is the ultimate goal of Buddhist practice and implies a release from the cycle of deaths and rebirths as well as the dissolution of all worldly physical and mental aggregates or skandhas (form, feeling, perception, mental fabrications and consciousness).
Unless TheGoodEarth plans on dying early, I suggest he better go do some reading and thinking. -
Then, a true buddhist may also do evil acts as per perception of others.Originally posted by yamizi:Well if you have 'yourself' to report to, then that is someone too. A true buddhist has no one, not even him/herself to report to =)
Be. -
this is getting no where, u guys are getting defensive on your believes.
the topic is also screwed, think a better phase would be, "which religious movement doesn't encourage self edification?"
if u believe something, u will be proud of it, u will stand beside it, it will be your pride, your banner.
its impossible to be for something, and yet have no ego (or basis views) about it. -
Simple, the title is actually meant to be an irony as Buddhism by right should have no claims to ego yet ego is still there in the whole movement.Originally posted by uglyguy:this is getting no where, u guys are getting defensive on your believes.
the topic is also screwed, think a better phase would be, "which religious movement doesn't encourage self edification?"
if u believe something, u will be proud of it, u will stand beside it, it will be your pride, your banner.
its impossible to be for something, and yet have no ego (or basis views) about it. -
ego is human nature, its not fair to compare it to religion.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Simple, the title is actually meant to be an irony as Buddhism by right should have no claims to ego yet ego is still there in the whole movement.
o.o.p. love your nick, one of my all time no.1 games i played.
my old megadrive. -
Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:I am very close to it, yet I do not see it...
You need a light?
Unless TheGoodEarth plans on dying early, I suggest he better go do some reading and thinking.
I've been thinking of a plan to get HZ out of CE's pants without dying or reading my eulogy. -
Buddhism have no rights and no claims except to iron out ego in Herzog.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Simple, the title is actually meant to be an irony as Buddhism by right should have no claims to ego yet ego is still there in the whole movement.