1. Incorrect. It is not about my sacrifice/culture better than
yours, but that there is a corruption in the understanding of the
blood sacrifices. But why do you raise this point when Buddhists
would also think that their way of salvation is better than others,
at least that's what Buddha taught when he decided to reject
Hinduism, right?
“Buddhists would also think that their way of salvation is
better than others, at least that's what Buddha taught when he
decided to reject Hinduism, right?” -> from your conclusion? And
no, we don’t think that our way of salvation is better than
anyone’s. Do good morals, meditation, right speech, right action
etc have labels? You are taught these things in Christianity too,
right? Buddha wasn’t a Buddhist and neither was jesus a
Christian.
1. Whether I jumped to conclusions about your engagement in ad
hominem or not, your heart knows. I shall not press this
further.
-> and my heart says no.
2. Why do you say it doesn't matter whether it is true if the
Buddha walked those steps at birth and uttered those words? If
truth does not matter, then does it matter if what Buddha taught
was true or not?
“Why do you say it doesn't matter whether it is true if the
Buddha walked those steps at birth and uttered those words? “->
I wasn’t there and I didn’t see. Also, in the lotus sutra, it
said buddha’s tongue was as large as the universe. What do you
think? Take it literally? Actually, in ancient India, having a
large tongue means speaking the truth. So, it meant the Buddha’s
was speaking a truth. You follow? Dude, did you read earlier posts
about four reliances? Do I have to keep reminding you? Or you
already have a fixed answer in your head and waiting for it to be
shouted out loud?
“If truth does not matter, then does it matter if what Buddha
taught was true or not?”
->
– Do not believe anything on mere hearsay.
– Do not believe in traditions merely because they are old and
have been handed down for many generations and in many places.
– Do not believe anything on account of rumors or because people
talk a a great deal about it.
– Do not believe anything because you are shown the written
testimony of some ancient sage.
– Do not believe in what you have fancied, thinking that,
because it is extraordinary, it must have been inspired by a god or
other wonderful being.
– Do not believe anything merely because presumption is in its
favor, or because the custom of many years inclines you to take it
as true.
– Do not believe anything merely on the authority of your
teachers and priests.
– But, whatever, after thorough investigation and reflection,
you find to agree with reason and experience, as conducive to the
good and benefit of one and all and of the world at large, accept
only that as true, and shape your life in accordance with it.
The same text, said the Buddha, must be applied to his own
teachings.
– Do not accept any doctrine from reverence, but first try it as
gold is tried by fire.
3. The Bible does not record what Jesus did between 12 and 30,
but there are clues which I have mentioned but again you
overlooked. Jewish children take after the trade of their fathers.
So Jesus was likely trained as a carpenter. He was also a regular
face at the synagogue. The religious leaders also noted that Jesus
was from Nazareth (not India). As to the Mormons, you must be very
confused. Mormons do not believe that between 12-30 years of age
Jesus went to America. Anyway what's your point? Jesus was a
globetrotter?
“but there are clues which I have mentioned but again you
overlooked. Jewish children take after the trade of their fathers.
So Jesus was likely trained as a carpenter.” -> so, one is
unsure and speculating, right? What led him to think he’s son of
god? Or god himself? We know Buddha became Buddha through vipassana
etc. Doesn’t sound like you when you are so adamant about origins
and must know everything eg creator etc.
“The religious leaders also noted that Jesus was from Nazareth
(not India)” -> who said he’s from India?
“As to the Mormons, you must be very confused. Mormons do not
believe that between 12-30 years of age Jesus went to America.
Anyway what's your point? Jesus was a globetrotter?” -> oh
right. They believe that jesus went to America after he died. The
point is to demonstrate different people have different theories
and your views are right for you and may not for everyone
else.
1. So you are saying that Mr Goenka has already been enlightened
and attained Nirvana? That does not seem to be communicated at
all.
-> broinchrist, did you read what I wrote? You said, “In
other words, would you agree that since no one is born a Buddhist,
and before one becomes a buddhist in life there would have been
negative karma accumulated from young? Even then, after becoming a
Buddhist it is unlikely that one will perfectly observe the 8 fold
path. Naming the Buddha and his disciples are just 2500 years too
far away. But if you know of someone who has perfectly observed it,
out of countless many, I would be interested to know of such people
currently living or in recent years.”
Since, we have established that there is no such thing as “100%
from birth to death” which sounds absurd to me, I said, “i think
goenka does. so do many monks” in regards to 8 fold path. Kindly
refrain from jumping into conclusions too hastily.
“So you are saying that Mr Goenka has already been enlightened
and attained Nirvana? That does not seem to be communicated at
all.” -> even if they are or aren’t, so what? And how do you
want them to communicate? Lit up fireworks? Advertise on
billboards, tv commercial etc?
2. There is also no discrimination in Christianity. Anyone can
become a Christian. But I think you may have confused the issue of
what it means to be exclusive.
-> and? Oh right, only Christians go to heaven. I’d assume
you know that one doesn’t need to have the Buddhist label to
achieve enlightenment, right? Buddha was never a Buddhist. Unlike
Christianity, we don’t worship the Buddha or Bodhisattva’s, we pay
respect and homage and meditate on their qualities. When I see an
image of Avalokitesvara Boddhisattva, the word compassion pops into
my mind and the quality to help others. You follow?
“I believe Buddha went about and taught others that he was
awakened, enlightened? Else how could he have claimed to know the
way out?” -> and? What are you trying to refer to?
“My point about asking for people you know, is also that I can
understand how such people are in real life. Do they have loved
ones? Are they attached to anything? Do they have desires in life,
like hungry for food or like to watch movies? Or are they just like
any other normal good person?” -> and? What good does it serve
you? For your mind satisfaction and mind orgasm? It's like as
though I'm a fan of the British royal family and I want to know
everything about them like what they eat, drink clothes etc. What
good is it?
“Hmm...so you blamed the Gospel for killing off cultures around
the world? Interesting. Some facts please?” -> are you for real
again, broinchrist? Ok. Let me try another approach so that you may
not feel too emotional and think it’s ad hominem.
What do you think? Is it the gold’s fault that people are
killed? Is it the diamond’s fault that people are killed? What do
you think, broinchrist? Does gospel advocate killing or fanatics
thinking “thou shalt have no other gods” applies to everyone just
because it is true to them? Also, please do your research on mayans
and the burning of their books during Spanish inquisition, perish
of paganism in Europe etc.
"As to witchcraft and salem. Pray tell what do you REALLY know
about it? Or are you simply based on hearsay? See
http://thetruthofthesalemwitchtrials.blogspot.sg/ in case you end
up in being unfair and prejudiced towards Christianity."
-> oh right. That one resource which resembles a
homework blog concludes everything? Are you for real again,
broinchrist? How about you try googling “salem witch trials
Christianity”
Here is one of many sites you can refer to.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/brief-salem.html
1. You don't think your way of salvation is better than others?
Now that's a very strange statement you made. And I wasn't even
talking about labels. I am asking whether you believe Buddhism is
exclusively true. Is the Middle Way the ONLY way?
2. Figures of speech and metaphors are understood. So are you
saying that Buddha's baby steps and speaking those words were NOT
literally true i.e. did not happen in fact? Your not witnessing it
is irrelevant to whether it happened or not.
3. That entire "Do not believe anything...." text? I take issue
with the part that says "But, whatever, after thorough
investigation and reflection, you find to agree with reason and
experience, as conducive to the good and benefit of one and all and
of the world at large, accept only that as true, and shape your
life in accordance with it." It simply say the same thing in a
different way! It say you should accept as true anything that
agrees with your own reason and experience. Conducive to good and
benefit of one and all? What is conducive? Again it has to agree
with your reason and experience. Basically it means to accept as
true what you accept as true. Why? Because the final arbiter of
truth is no other than yourself! But our reasoning is not
infallible.
4. There are better grounds to conclude that Jesus was in the
land of Israel than the baseless speculation that He went to India
or the Americas between 12-30 years of age. Jesus never doubted His
own divinity. The Scriptures teach that Jesus was always aware of
His own deity. It did not occur to Him that He was the Son of God.
BTW, there's nothing wrong with being adamant about the issue of
origins. You are just as adamant about it as me.
5. Re the point about Jesus going to America. Since you are
wrong about the Mormons' beliefs, it proves that it is false to
think that conflicting and contradictory views can be a matter of
what's right for you is just for you.
6. Basically you are conceding that there is no good basis to
think that Mr Goenka is enlightened or has attained Nirvana. We can
leave it as that.
7. Perhaps you did not know that the earliest believers were
only called Christians some years after Jesus went to heaven?
That was in Antioch, Acts 11. So one need not be called a Christian
to be a follower of Christ. That was so in the earliest years. But
then again, there's nothing wrong with being called that now.
8. If a person who supposedly attained Nirvana is not any
different from a person who has not i.e. he still have emotions and
affections, he falls sick and can suffer and die, then how do you
tell the diff?
9. Since the Gospel does not teach or advocate killing off
cultures or peoples, there is no basis to fault the Gospel.
10. So the Smithsonian website concludes everything but not the
website I linked? Genetic fallacy on your part here. Anyway the
point is, what do you intend to prove with the Salem Witch Trials?
That millions of innocent people died? Or perhaps only a number of
people died? And that it had really nothing to do with the Bible at
all but that some people acted on their fears and it was a trial
gone wrong? Many people like to throw up things like Crusades or
Inquisition or Salem as mere smoke screens and red herrings. These
things, tragic as they are, do not reflect Christian teachings.