Criticism of Buddhism

[firedragon]

Buddhism is based on the Gautham Buddha who's teachings supposedly were brought down in councils and finally the Tipitaka which is the most revered scripture was penned down. Everyone knows this.

The topic of Buddhism comes up predominantly from the Bahai's, secondarily from the Buddhists and Hindus who believe Buddhism is actually Hinduism but a strand of it. This is my personal experience in this forum.

Some assert that the teachings of the religion or philosophy is decided by the actions of the people who adhere to it. I outright disagree with that, but this assertion is very prominent in the forum. Thus, how do you justify this belief that the teachings are decided by judging history? Thus, what is the Buddhist history and how does it reflect the Tipitaka, the Jathaka's, the Nidhana's?

 

[sun rise]

Given the wild diversity of what is called Hinduism including polytheists, monotheists and even atheists., Buddhism has indeed been seen by some as part of the very broad umbrella of Hinduism. There are endless web sites on this question. Certainly both are focused on dharma

From decades ago when I studied Zen and Tibetan Buddhism and visited centers, the focus was not on theology but practice and adapting the practice to the west. The leader of a Zen center substituted picking up litter for begging for food, for example. A Tibetan ashram had a period of work every day where you were supposed to work on fixing/cleaning whatever bothered you.

History and dogma were basically ignored outside of the 'Four Noble Truths" and a bit more. The first 2 are self evident: we all experience suffering of one sort or another. Suffering in the psychological sense is caused by wanting (getting what you don't want, not getting what you want and so forth).

Believing that suffering can be ended is a article of faith. The 4th, the 8-fold path can be subdivided into ethics, meditation and developing wisdom

This nature of Buddhism is why people can be Buddhists and another religion at the same time. I quite like a book by a woman who wrote about being an observant Jew and a Buddhist and finding no contradiction in being both at the same time.

As far as history itself goes, we know very little with any serious proof of all religions except Islam. The history of the founders of those religions and the scriptures attributed to them is a subject of faith or disbelief but not proof by today's historical standards.

 

[firedragon]

This nature of Buddhism is why people can be Buddhists and another religion at the same time. I quite like a book by a woman who wrote about being an observant Jew and a Buddhist and finding no contradiction in being both at the same time.

Can you explain how you think this is possible?

 

[firedragon]

As far as history itself goes, we know very little with any serious proof of all religions except Islam. The history of the founders of those religions and the scriptures attributed to them is a subject of faith or disbelief but not proof by today's historical standards.

I should have been more clear. This "history" that was asserted by some of our forum members was the history of people and their actions. Basically, if they killed people, Buddhism is a murderous ideology. If they didnt, then Buddhism is a pacifist ideology. That was the assertion, and that is what I am questioning.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Buddhism is based on the Gautham Buddha who's teachings supposedly were brought down in councils and finally the Tipitaka which is the most revered scripture was penned down. Everyone knows this.

The topic of Buddhism comes up predominantly from the Bahai's, secondarily from the Buddhists and Hindus who believe Buddhism is actually Hinduism but a strand of it. This is my personal experience in this forum.

Some assert that the teachings of the religion or philosophy is decided by the actions of the people who adhere to it. I outright disagree with that, but this assertion is very prominent in the forum. Thus, how do you justify this belief that the teachings are decided by judging history? Thus, what is the Buddhist history and how does it reflect the Tipitaka, the Jathaka's, the Nidhana's?

It's actually Gautama. Siddhartha Gautama.
(James, James Bond...)

Buddhism is actually quite expansive and like many major religions is multifaceted and diverse to a point that not one form of Buddhism reflects as already alluded.

It's actual history is not clear with exceptions to its origins stemming from India and China in form of Theravada, Mayahana , and Chan which produced Zen.

Of course now the modern adaptation and interpretation while derisive at times remains a valid aspect of dharma imv.

I don't think history while useful as it is, should become stagnated to a point it hobbles ones practice in the religion.

Buddhism isn't about dogma.

 

[firedragon]

It's actually Gautama. Siddhartha Gautama.

No. Its not. Siddhartha Gautama is not a name. Gauthama is a given name or an attribution. Its not his name.

Gautama is the male version of Gautami or Gothami after his mom who looked after him, prajapathi Gothami. This is according to legends of course. His name was Siddhartha which means the "doer of good or truth". Gauthama means the darkness and other things and is traditionally referred to represent the Sun. Something that gives light so bright.

Buddhism is actually quite expansive and like many major religions is multifaceted and diverse to a point that not one form of Buddhism reflects as already alluded.

It's actual history is not clear with exceptions to its origins stemming from India and China in form of Theravada, Mayahana , and Chan which produced Zen.

Of course now the modern adaptation and interpretation while derisive at times remains a valid aspect of dharma imv.

I don't think history while useful as it is, should become stagnated to a point it hobbles ones practice in the religion.

Buddhism isn't about dogma.

Well, you are right. Buddhism is so eclectic but most of the adherents dont really have that kind of birds eye view. There is no "Theravada, Mahayana and Chan (which is Zen)", because Chan is Chinese and is in itself Mahayana. So Mahayana and Zen is practically the same, or you can say strand of Zen Buddhism which means having a mind like a diamond.

This history referred in the OP is not the history of Buddhism per se brother. Its about the history of Buddhists and what they do. I should have elaborated that further in the OP.

Thanks.

 

[crossfire]

<...>
This nature of Buddhism is why people can be Buddhists and another religion at the same time. I quite like a book by a woman who wrote about being an observant Jew and a Buddhist and finding no contradiction in being both at the same time.
<...>

Can you explain how you think this is possible?

The guidance Buddha gave regarding the teachings of other religions: reject teachings that preach and propagate greed, hatred, or delusion as leading to long-term harm. Accept teachings that teach a lack of greed, hatred, or delusion as leading to long-term benefit.
Kalama Sutta: The Instruction to the Kalamas

 

[firedragon]

The guidance Buddha gave regarding the teachings of other religions: reject teachings that preach and propagate greed, hatred, or delusion as leading to long-term harm. Accept teachings that teach a lack of greed, hatred, or delusion as leading to long-term benefit.
Kalama Sutta: The Instruction to the Kalamas

See, Kalam Sutta is only a fraction of the Anguttara Nikaaya which is a fraction of the Tipitaka being 1 of the five chapters in the Sutta Pitaka.

How is Buddhism as a whole compatible with Judaism? Or do you mean you can add a little bit of Buddhist teachings to any religion? If that is the case, a little bit of any religion can be in harmony with any other religion.

Thats why I ask for a holistic picture from Sun Rise. Hope you understand.

 

[crossfire]

See, Kalam Sutta is only a fraction of the Anguttara Nikaaya which is a fraction of the Tipitaka being 1 of the five chapters in the Sutta Pitaka.

How is Buddhism as a whole compatible with Judaism? Or do you mean you can add a little bit of Buddhist teachings to any religion? If that is the case, a little bit of any religion can be in harmony with any other religion.

Thats why I ask for a holistic picture from Sun Rise. Hope you understand.

If you are a Buddhist Jew, you accept Jewish teachings that lead to a lack of greed, hatred, and delusion, and reject teachings that preach and propagate greed, hatred, or delusion. The goal is to purify your mind from these poisons. When you purify your mind in such a manner, you develop the four sublime states (brahmavihārās) as described in verse 16. Development of the four sublime states is compatible with whatever religious and/or philosophical goal one might hold as described in the four solaces in verse 17. (Which I prefer over Pascal's wager.)

 

[Aupmanyav]

Basically, if they killed people, Buddhism is a murderous ideology. If they didn't, then Buddhism is a pacifist ideology. That was the assertion, and that is what I am questioning.

Killing is necessary under certain circumstances. But was it done for personal benefit or in hatred because of different beliefs? in that case, it is sin. If it is the demand of one's 'dharma', then it does not involve any sin.

As perhaps you know, I consider Buddha as one of my two gurus. My own views do not differ from Buddhism except for minor details. Most Hindus consider Buddha to be the ninth and the latest avatara of Lord Vishnu, so they would not be wrong if they consider Buddhism as a branch of Hinduism.

It's actually Gautama. Siddhartha Gautama.

That depends on whether one is from North India or from South India and South East Asia, where the pronunciation or spelling will be Gauthama.

How is Buddhism as a whole compatible with Judaism?

Abrahamic religions are as far from Budhism as North Pole ad South Pole can be. That greed and hatred should be avoided in not a copy-right of any particular religion. Religions plagiarize them. This is a general social rule which existed before religions came up.

If you are a Buddhist Jew, you accept ..

What happens for YHVH? That will be considered a delusion in Buddhism.
"I am the Lord thy God"
Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

 

[firedragon]

If you are a Buddhist Jew, you accept Jewish teachings that lead to a lack of greed, hatred, and delusion, and reject teachings that preach and propagate greed, hatred, or delusion.

I dont think any buddhism or anything is needed for that. I doubt any Jew will say that their religion propagates greed, hatred or delusion.

The goal is to purify your mind from these poisons. When you purify your mind in such a manner, you develop the four sublime states (brahmavihārās) as described in verse 16. Development of the four sublime states is compatible with whatever religious and/or philosophical goal one might hold as described in the four solaces in verse 17. (Which I prefer over Pascal's wager.)

Pascals wager is not some religious core methodology for propagation. Anyway, if you think pascals wager is core to Judaism (as an example), then do you say they are opposing theological positions? In that case you have to remove part of Judaism to adopt a small part of Buddhism. Correct?

Anyway, Maithri, Karuna, Mudhitha, Upeksha are all within Judaism as well as a theology. Karaniya Meththa Kusalena, it is already part of Judaism. Only difference would be that the Buddhist Madhyama Prathipadha would be not part of Judaism, but is the main, core teaching of Buddhism. Thus, it would conflict at fundamental level.

 

[firedragon]

Killing is necessary under certain circumstances. But was it done for personal benefit or in hatred because of different beliefs? in that case, it is sin. If it is the demand of one's 'dharma', then it does not involve any sin.

As perhaps you know, I consider Buddha as one of my two gurus. My own views do not differ from Buddhism except for minor details. Most Hindus consider Buddha to be the ninth and the latest avatara of Lord Vishnu, so they would not be wrong if they consider Buddhism as a branch of Hinduism.

• Do you think the Kalinga Mega invasions by the Hindus were because of their doctrine or social construct?
• What about the Anshi rebellion, SinoJapanese war, Buddhist core or social construct?

 

[firedragon]

Abrahamic religions are as far from Budhism as North Pole ad South Pole can be. That greed and hatred should be avoided in not a copy-right of any particular religion. Religions plagiarize them. This is a general social rule which existed before religions came up.

Maybe you dont know any of these religions and you have some other agenda right now to bring in religions, pluralism, and hatred, greed etc.

But no religion teaches greed, hatred, etc. One person here is saying Buddhism and Judaism together can be followed, and another is saying they are like nor pole and South Pole.

And what evidence do you have to prove that "this is a general rule that existed before religions came up"? Any historical records to show exactly when religions came up in human history and when these social rules were written somewhere? Please show some evidence.

Thanks.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Do you think the Kalinga Mega invasions by the Hindus were because of their doctrine or social construct?
What about the Anshi rebellion, SinoJapanese war, Buddhist core or social construct?

Why should I worry about that. I do not even know about this Kalinga Mega invasion? Is that something happened in India or in any other country? People has done wrongs and people have done right. It is not that every thing that a Hindu does is right. As far as I know the Japanese were wrong to invade China and Korea and causing those people to suffer.

 

[Aupmanyav]

But no religion teaches greed, hatred, etc. One person here is saying Buddhism and Judaism together can be followed, and another is saying they are like nor pole and South Pole.
And what evidence do you have to prove that "this is a general rule that existed before religions came up"? Any historical records to show exactly when religions came up in human history and when these social rules were written somewhere? Please show some evidence.

Yeah, we have our different views. What is strange in that?
Code of Hammurabi (c. 1810 – c. 1750 BCE).

I dont think any buddhism or anything is needed for that.

See here. You yourself agree that for these thing no religion is needed. Religions have just latched upon the basic social laws as if they owned them.

 

[crossfire]

I dont think any buddhism or anything is needed for that. I doubt any Jew will say that their religion propagates greed, hatred or delusion.



Pascals wager is not some religious core methodology for propagation. Anyway, if you think pascals wager is core to Judaism (as an example), then do you say they are opposing theological positions? In that case you have to remove part of Judaism to adopt a small part of Buddhism. Correct?

Yes, one would remove the teachings that propagate greed, hatred, or delusion.

Anyway, Maithri, Karuna, Mudhitha, Upeksha are all within Judaism as well as a theology. Karaniya Meththa Kusalena, it is already part of Judaism. Only difference would be that the Buddhist Madhyama Prathipadha would be not part of Judaism, but is the main, core teaching of Buddhism. Thus, it would conflict at fundamental level.

Is mediating between the self-gratification of the id (pleasure principle {maladjusted as greed}) and the self-depreciation of the superego (perfection principle {maladjusted as hatred}) via the conscious cognition of the ego (reality principle {maladjusted as delusion}) incompatible with Judaism? Not that I am aware of. {Making peace between the nagas and the garudas}

 

[firedragon]

Why should I worry about that.

Its not about worrying. Its about "doing the research".

 

[firedragon]

Yes, one would remove the teachings that propagate greed, hatred, or delusion.

You mean to say Judaism has "propagation of greed, hatred or delusion"?

Is mediating between the self-gratification of the id (pleasure principle {maladjusted as greed}) and the self-depreciation of the superego (perfection principle {maladjusted as hatred}) via the conscious cognition of the ego (reality principle {maladjusted as delusion}) incompatible with Judaism? Not that I am aware of. {Making peace between the nagas and the garudas}

Nagas and Garudas in Buddhism? Garuda? And naga of Paramasivan?

That was an absurd comment to make CF. Thats not Buddhism.

 

[firedragon]

Yeah, we have our different views. What is strange in that?
Code of Hammurabi (c. 1810 – c. 1750 BCE).

Are you saying there were no religions before 1810 BCE? Cmon Aup. You know better? And you know that you just made your comments up and now you cant provide any evidence to it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

There surely were. There were Indo-Europians since 7,000 BCE (Seroglazovka Culture) and in Middle-East also. Then in Egypt, Indus Valley and so many others. Many known, many unknown. I just gave you one example.