9 Oct 2013 22:32
Leave it to the Westerners to twist something 2500 years old to suit their limited world-view. There was and is a reason for Buddhas 84,000 teachings. Once you try to change it in a vain attempt to make sense of something you clearly are not ready to grasp, you no longer have Buddhism; you have some quasi-religion/philosophy/new-age movement that serves no purpose other than to satisfy your ego.
Atheists can't contemplate? The Buddha rejected the religion of his birth...and sat and contemplated...and didn't create a religion as a result, but a philosophy?
I don't rant, I reason ... but the post is quite right in reminding the 'civilised modern man' of his arrogance.lol Thomas could have written this rant...he says the exact same thing about Unity and me...
I don't rant, I reason ... but the post is quite right in reminding the 'civilised modern man' of his arrogance.
The distinction between 'religion' and 'philosophy' is a modern one, unique to the West, indeed commentaries from the Eastern Traditions point out quite explicitly that such a distinction is artificial.
By drawing a separation between the two, the implication is that religion is without philosophical reason on the one hand, and the 'proper' practice of philosophy is not sullied by religious 'superstition'.
The claim is nonsense, the founders of the Western Philosophical Tradition, saw no distinction between 'philosophy', 'metaphysics' and 'religion'. It's just the western mind compartmentalising that which it does not immediately comprehend and the desire to possess and command that which it thinks it does – we assume de facto we know better than anyone else.
No, on reflection I am inclined to agree ...Not to put too fine a point on it, but quite honestly when I read the back and forth between you and Wil, I often get the feeling that you aren't actually talking about the same thing.
Just a little friendly feedback you can feel free to dismiss if I'm way off