If There Was Any Doubt Of Labour's Anti...
News0 min ago
buddhism
48 Answers
Im looking for an easy way to learn about buddhism iv always been drawn towards this, the trouble i have is im pretty much house bound with breathing problems (copd) so its hard getting to some ,classes, i wondered if there was any internet sites that anyone out there nos of or easy reading books, i borght the four noble truths by dalai lama but dident understand it at all and stopped reading it in the end, im hoping the yoga side of it would help my breathing and love the peacefullness that meditation would bring, if the classes were easy accesable and in the yorkshire area it may be possible. any help or advice on buddhism would be greatly appreciated . thanks xxx
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by suzee1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
The problem is, though Whickerman, we all know that alternative view sites are easily accessed. I think England's own Malcolm Muggeridge said it best; "There is no new news, only old news read by new people"...I've engaged various posters here for nearly two years and in doing so, I've seen the same responses and arguments that I've known for many years. I'm sure most that adhere to an agnotic or atheist view have also seen the same responses from the believing crowd.
For example, your argument re: the Tetragrammaton... YHWH.. each of the sites you present will all admit that, since Hebrew has no vowels, and, especially, since that reverence for the Name of God among the earliest priests was such that it was never spoken, we today and for many millenia past, don't really know what the translation is. Our good firend chaklka has, often posited your exact position, garnered, I suppose from the same source(s).
We all have a bias... I've never engaged anyone here that I had any hope of (or intention to) convert. But for every position you can butress with links or quotes, I can argue reasonably against, no? My sites are the results of years of study by men and women with the requisite titles following their names... as intelligent and motivated as yours. There is an ultimate question, never referenced in this site, however. But, I'll refrain in going there at this time.
Contd.
For example, your argument re: the Tetragrammaton... YHWH.. each of the sites you present will all admit that, since Hebrew has no vowels, and, especially, since that reverence for the Name of God among the earliest priests was such that it was never spoken, we today and for many millenia past, don't really know what the translation is. Our good firend chaklka has, often posited your exact position, garnered, I suppose from the same source(s).
We all have a bias... I've never engaged anyone here that I had any hope of (or intention to) convert. But for every position you can butress with links or quotes, I can argue reasonably against, no? My sites are the results of years of study by men and women with the requisite titles following their names... as intelligent and motivated as yours. There is an ultimate question, never referenced in this site, however. But, I'll refrain in going there at this time.
Contd.
Contd.
Therefore the question really comes down to "why"... why can different people be exposed to the same evidence and each come away leaning in differing directions? Usually, when I've decided to return to this fray, it results in many of the responders (they know who they are) displaying an obvious air of superiority and denegrating any postion, no matter how well or eloquently defended. You, I'll have to say, have been fairly reasonable, but also an undercurrent exists
.
Many reasonable believers have come and gone on these threads. Many, never to return. Often, the resulting discussion among the anti-crowd is that of a self-congratulating torrent of "we showed them, since they can't respond"... when, in reality, one soon reaches a limit of abuse. Maybe it's my bias showing, but I really don't notice the same treatment from the believers. (Theland has managed to survive, but only because, in my opinion, of his ability at self-effacing humor. Even then, that's interspersed from the opposition with thinly veiled references to his lack of intelligence).
My last venture, for example, was cut short since the owner of the thread objected to my longer posts and I was disinvited, which I certainly honored. However, one of the other posters in opposition posted equally as long responses... not a problem, but not conducive to an itelligent, reasoned exchange.
Contd.
Therefore the question really comes down to "why"... why can different people be exposed to the same evidence and each come away leaning in differing directions? Usually, when I've decided to return to this fray, it results in many of the responders (they know who they are) displaying an obvious air of superiority and denegrating any postion, no matter how well or eloquently defended. You, I'll have to say, have been fairly reasonable, but also an undercurrent exists
.
Many reasonable believers have come and gone on these threads. Many, never to return. Often, the resulting discussion among the anti-crowd is that of a self-congratulating torrent of "we showed them, since they can't respond"... when, in reality, one soon reaches a limit of abuse. Maybe it's my bias showing, but I really don't notice the same treatment from the believers. (Theland has managed to survive, but only because, in my opinion, of his ability at self-effacing humor. Even then, that's interspersed from the opposition with thinly veiled references to his lack of intelligence).
My last venture, for example, was cut short since the owner of the thread objected to my longer posts and I was disinvited, which I certainly honored. However, one of the other posters in opposition posted equally as long responses... not a problem, but not conducive to an itelligent, reasoned exchange.
Contd.
Contd.
In the context of the present question, I'd point out that Buddhism is granted relief from the any of the criticisms aimed at Christianity in a number of areas. One is this fact: "... "For the first five hundred years the Scriptures were orally transmitted. They were written down only at the beginning of the Christian era, because at that time the decline in faith threatened their continued survival in the memories of the monks. Different schools wrote down different things. ( "Buddhist Scriptures" by Edward Conze.. ) Yet the relatively short time (5 to 60 years) of oral transmission of the Scriptures is viewed as a fatal flaw. Additionally, while the historicity of The Christ is well established, "..."The historicity of Buddha is accepted by all. But there is no unanimity of the date. In Sri Lanka, 483 BC is accepted as the date of his nirvana while in Burma 544 BC is accepted. In Tibet it is believed to be 835 BC, while in China, 11th century BC is the accepted date. Buddha was an Indian and the Indian Puranic tradition believes that the nirvana took place in 1793 or 1807 BC" ("The Life of Buddha As Legend and History" by Edward J.Thomas). Again such uncertaintiy regarding Jesus would have ended the Christian story, no?
Finally, even a cursory examination of Buddhism here in the Western cultures reveals it has little resemblance to the mother beleif. It has become nothing more than "...the respectable elements of New Age, merely called "Buddhism" and missing all of its main elements, replacing them with commercialist and popularist gimmicks. The London Buddhist Society and other high-brow Buddhist institutions in the West are inactive, elitist gatherings of intelligent pseudo-Buddhists, genuine Buddhists in the West are very hard to find. (Source: "The Social Face of Buddhism" by Ken H Jones, original 1989 edition).
Contd.
In the context of the present question, I'd point out that Buddhism is granted relief from the any of the criticisms aimed at Christianity in a number of areas. One is this fact: "... "For the first five hundred years the Scriptures were orally transmitted. They were written down only at the beginning of the Christian era, because at that time the decline in faith threatened their continued survival in the memories of the monks. Different schools wrote down different things. ( "Buddhist Scriptures" by Edward Conze.. ) Yet the relatively short time (5 to 60 years) of oral transmission of the Scriptures is viewed as a fatal flaw. Additionally, while the historicity of The Christ is well established, "..."The historicity of Buddha is accepted by all. But there is no unanimity of the date. In Sri Lanka, 483 BC is accepted as the date of his nirvana while in Burma 544 BC is accepted. In Tibet it is believed to be 835 BC, while in China, 11th century BC is the accepted date. Buddha was an Indian and the Indian Puranic tradition believes that the nirvana took place in 1793 or 1807 BC" ("The Life of Buddha As Legend and History" by Edward J.Thomas). Again such uncertaintiy regarding Jesus would have ended the Christian story, no?
Finally, even a cursory examination of Buddhism here in the Western cultures reveals it has little resemblance to the mother beleif. It has become nothing more than "...the respectable elements of New Age, merely called "Buddhism" and missing all of its main elements, replacing them with commercialist and popularist gimmicks. The London Buddhist Society and other high-brow Buddhist institutions in the West are inactive, elitist gatherings of intelligent pseudo-Buddhists, genuine Buddhists in the West are very hard to find. (Source: "The Social Face of Buddhism" by Ken H Jones, original 1989 edition).
Contd.
Fini
Although Buddhism rightfully lays claim, in most part, to non-agressiveness and other virtues, search as you may, there are no answers for where did we come from, why are we here and where are we going...
So, have a really good day! I hope it's warm wherever you may be, since it's -21F here in the intermountain area of the western U.S. Expected high today is -5F... waiting for spring!
Although Buddhism rightfully lays claim, in most part, to non-agressiveness and other virtues, search as you may, there are no answers for where did we come from, why are we here and where are we going...
So, have a really good day! I hope it's warm wherever you may be, since it's -21F here in the intermountain area of the western U.S. Expected high today is -5F... waiting for spring!
Theland, don't be too hasty in your welcome. Clanad is mistaken when she says 'search as you may, there are no answers .........'. There are answers, and you don't need to wade through mounds of literature to find them Just google Buddhism and they'll be staring you in the face.
'Why are we here?' and 'where are we going?' Buddhists are here to strive for enlightenment, and Nirvana is their ultimate destination.
As far as 'where did we come from?' goes, unlike people of some other religions, Buddhists have the good sense not to postulate upon, or to presume to confirm the veracity of, something that cannot possibly be known.
'Why are we here?' and 'where are we going?' Buddhists are here to strive for enlightenment, and Nirvana is their ultimate destination.
As far as 'where did we come from?' goes, unlike people of some other religions, Buddhists have the good sense not to postulate upon, or to presume to confirm the veracity of, something that cannot possibly be known.
