I think with appearance of technology, it both helps and brings
down the buddhist faith.
Never has it been so that information can be disseminate at speed
and mass audience in this manner in the past.
I think the idea of no-self is often exaggerately elaborated. I'm
not exactly sure did AEN give a inferior representation or HZ
yourself deliberately choose to twist the meaning.
No-self is a concept in Buddhism which the Buddha said that there
is no conditioned phenomenon exist on its own. This means to say
that due to many other contributing causes and factors, then the
varies phenomenon exist. And such phenomenon do not last forever.
How do we ever imagine forever to be how long?
So no-self here simply refers to that there is not sole entity that
pops out of nowhere (as compared to the christian god) and last
forever. And that doesn't mean HZ you don't exist. Now HZ exist.
How about 50 years ago? Or say 2000 years down the road? Will HZ
still exist? Or in fact HZ is just a brand name of your ID in this
forum. In fact comparing to the HZ now and 10 years ago, definitely
your perception, thinking, maturity, etc would have changed. The HZ
you are now is not the HZ 10 years ago.
Your HZ physical form may retain (though it changes too, ageing, no
one can stop it) but your other attributes changes as well.
Bhante S Dhammika gave an analogy on football. He was citing that
Manchester United exist as a football team. Despite they have
changed players, tactics, etc, they still exist and known by the
label as Manchester United but however, the attributes (the
different strengths in different players) changes.
So in the short time spent, we do have an ID and I mentioned in
another thread, it depends what you want to do with your life (ID).
Say if you want to be a singer, then probably go through some
proper singing school (to change your attributes to your current
ID), etc. Therefore because of no-self, there is room for changes
and most importantly improvements.
My understanding is Buddhism certainly has persuasion. Buddha
Himself told the Sangha that 'let no two walk the same direction,
for the good and the benefit of all, share the Dhamma generously'.
However, I think there are various degrees of persuasion and how is
it done is really up to the individual. Most buddhists are more
passive; whereas some buddhist cults are more aggressive (I like
that though haha).
However, I really agree with you that buddhists (not all though)
usually has a self righteousness issue. They always like to bring
down other people's religion. And many times, they have little idea
what are these other religions about and quick to label them as
spirits, gui3 shen2. But this cannot blame them as many are quick
into believe the so-called masters' words.
HZ, if you notice, buddhists are more tolerating to christianity
than chinese deities, and to think that most people here are
chinese. Haha
