I think it takes more than just neatly formulating your philosophical propositions. Buddhism did receive quite a bit of criticism from other systems, such as Advaita, and from the Bhakti movement that was quite popular.
This tends to show that not everyone was convinced. — Apollodorus
*sigh*This being the case, perhaps you don't understand Buddhism, after all? — Apollodorus
The idea that “Dharmic” systems are in any way “superior” in this (or any other) respect seems unfounded to say the least.
The “Dharmic foundation” didn’t work in Gandhi’s case. And if it didn’t work for Gandhi, I don’t see why others would stand a better chance. — Apollodorus
I think people either are made for spiritual life or they are not. If they aren’t, then no amount of suppression is going to work.
The truth of the matter is that for a long time India’s female population has been declining
/.../
The culmination of the Way of Righteousness is renunciation. The righteous must renounce all attachment to earthly life in order to attain eternal life, just as Christ laid down his own life in order to conquer Death. — Apollodorus
This shows that Buddhism is not necessarily “superior” to Western systems. When Westerners uncritically turn to Eastern systems, they often do so out of ignorance of their own tradition. And acting out of ignorance does not seem to be a good start. Ignorance can cause us to fall into all kinds of traps.
As for people who disbelieve in rebirth, or who lack belief in rebirth, I have observed the following in regard to enlightenment (one or a combination of more can be seen in such a person):
1. they generally lack ambition in spiritual life;
2. they believe they are already enlightened;
3. they believe they are inevitably close to being enlightened;
4. they believe enlightenment is an ancient, "highfalutin" idea that has no place in modern life;
5. they flat-out don't care about whether they become enlightened or not. — baker
Are you suggesting that any of them are a problem? If so, why? — praxis
I haven't seen any explanation as to how their could be determinable inter-subjective confirmation re religious experience, or any other kind of subjective experience and judgement (aesthetics). — Janus
In regard to everyday observations of the world it is easy to check if everybody is observing the same thing.
and I think the judgement that secular Buddhism is not "really" Buddhism is an example of the 'no true Scotsman" fallacy. — Janus
She makes a consistent case from the role of compassion in attaining enlightenment - not sure this has come up all that often so far. In her autobiography The Spiral Staircase she writes:
Compassion has been advocated by all the great faiths because it has been found to be the safest and surest means of attaining enlightenment. It dethrones the ego from the center of our lives and puts others there, breaking down the carapace of selfishness that holds us back from an experience of the sacred. And it gives us ecstasy, broadening our perspectives and giving us a larger, enhanced vision. As a very early Buddhist poem puts it: 'May our loving thoughts fill the whole world; above, below, across — without limit; a boundless goodwill toward the whole world, unrestricted, free of hatred and enmity.' We are liberated from personal likes and dislikes that limit our vision, and are able to go beyond ourselves."
— Karen Armstrong — Tom Storm
So you believe those observations indicate a problem but can't explain what the problem(s) are.
— praxis
It would be a breach of the TOS to do so. — baker
And yet people have been doing it for millennia. — baker
In order to meaningfully observe the LHC and understand how it works, one has to have the according education. Without such education, the LHC does't make sense (or makes sense only indirectly/vicariously, via the faith that one has that scientists are doing meaningful things and not magic). — baker
How does anyone actually stomach words like these? Or is it that they believe _other_ people should be like that, ie. that _other_ people should have compassion, _other_ people should overcome their egos, etc.? — baker
What a brainfart. — baker
This troubled him deeply, and he sought to overcome it. — baker
Just the kind of thing a Hindu would say. — baker
People are diverse, and it seems absurd to me to suggest that one's spiritual aspirations are necessarily dependent on one's belief in rebirth. — Janus
I generally dislike the term "spiritual", "spirituality". I do not consider myself "spiritual". I feel sickened if I read about "spirituality". — baker
This is a gross generalization. People are diverse, and it seems absurd to me to suggest that one's spiritual aspirations are necessarily dependent on one's belief in rebirth. — Janus
You have no warrant for such a generalization since the number of spiritual aspirants you could possibly know well would still be a tiny percentage of the total.
On the Buddhist understanding of rebirth, from a purely egotistical viewpoint how could the conditions a future life enjoys or suffers, since it is not me, possibly matter to me?
If I have already overcome the egoic orientation to a degree that would allow it to matter, then the belief would be irrelevant, because if all I was concerned with was how my actions might affect the conditions that future beings find themselves in, then I could reasonably be more concerned with my actions and their effects on people in this present everyday life.
All we know is that they thought they were doing it; no guarantee that they were correct in thinking that.
Yes, but whether or not someone understands the workings of the LHC is itself completely determinable;
whereas whether or not someone is enlightened is not. If we think of enlightenment as a matter of a certain lived disposition then it would be determinable in terms of their behavior, just as the greatness of a pianist can be manifest in her playing. (and even this much is not precisely determinable, as the understanding of the workings of the LHC would be).
If we take enlightenment to involve the possession of some special, propositional knowledge then it is impossible to determine if someone has it.That's why I say it is like an art, not like a science.
I think compassion is something you either understand or don't. A little like having theory of mind - not sure it can be taught. — Tom Storm
Shows what Buddhism does to brainwashed (or braindead) Westerners. — Apollodorus
It takes a physicist to know a physicist; it takes a good pianist to know a good pianist; it takes an enlightened person to know an enligthened person. Enlightenment is nothing special, in this sense. — baker
I generally dislike the term "spiritual", "spirituality". I do not consider myself "spiritual". I feel sickened if I read about "spirituality". — baker
Pretty much says it all. — Apollodorus
What Armstrong is describing there is closer to what is termed "idiot compassion" (look it up, there are several understandings of the term) or pathological altruism. — baker
What a truly, deeply, spiritually spiritual comment. — baker
It was neither the philologist nor the scholar that I saw, but a soul that is every day realizing its oneness with the universe …
By the period of Puranic Hinduism, in the medieval period, the language of the hymns had become "almost entirely unintelligible" … In the 19th- and early 20th-centuries, reformers like Swami Dayananda Saraswati (founder of the Arya Samaj) and Sri Aurobindo (founder of Sri Aurobindo Ashram) discussed the philosophies of the Vedas … According to Dayananda and Aurobindo the Vedic scholars had a monotheistic conception …
Theosophy is the best serum we know of, whose injection never fails to develop the queer moths finding lodgment in some brains attempting to pass muster as sound … the Theosophists must not be confused with the great Indian nation, the majority of whom have clearly seen through the Theosophical phenomena from the start and, following the great Swami Dayânanda Sarasvati who took away his patronage from Blavatskism the moment he found it out, have held themselves aloof … the Theosophists wanted to crawl into the heart of Western Society, catching on to the skirts of scholars like Max Müller and poets like Edwin Arnold, all the same denouncing these very men and posing as the only receptacles of universal wisdom. And one heaves a sigh of relief that this wonderful wisdom is kept a secret. Indian thought, charlatanry, and mango-growing fakirism had all become identified in the minds of educated people in the West, and this was all the help rendered to Hindu religion by the Theosophists … the Hindus have enough of religious teaching and teachers amidst themselves even in this Kali Yuga, and they do not stand in need of dead ghosts of Russians and Americans …
The too prevalent ignorance among even adult Sinhalese Buddhists of the ethical code of their religion leads me to issue this little compilation …
The divine Lord [Buddha whom he also calls “Supreme Lord”] conquered the world by the fulfilment of the Paramitas ten [the ten virtues] and for the last five days I invoked his all-powerful Name that I should succeed in His work … All good Buddhists have to be born in India for final salvation … My Saviour, the blessed Buddha … My life I consecrate to Thee, O Lord … H.P. [High Priest H. Sumangala] sent word to say that I should not attack Christianity. He is very tolerant; but does not know that Buddha had a mission to destroy error … There are thousands of liberal-minded, educated Englishmen to whom the Doctrine of the Aryans must be preached … The English must not be allowed to die of spiritual inanition ...
I think Baker enjoys being a contrarian just for the sake of it. I can't think of any other explanation for the absurd and cynical generalizations she comes up with. — Janus
And seeing that we are in agreement, I am sure you will also agree with my analysis, below. — Apollodorus
That's a very negative reading of Armstrong's few words on compassion. I've tried a few times to re-read it wearing my cap of cynicism and still can't see what you see in those words. That said, Armstrong may well practice a form of idiot compassion in her life, but this isn't clear from those few sentences. — Tom Storm
Compassion has been advocated by all the great faiths because it has been found to be the safest and surest means of attaining enlightenment.
It dethrones the ego from the center of our lives and puts others there, breaking down the carapace of selfishness
And it gives us ecstasy, broadening our perspectives and giving us a larger, enhanced vision.
As a very early Buddhist poem puts it: 'May our loving thoughts fill the whole world; above, below, across — without limit; a boundless goodwill toward the whole world, unrestricted, free of hatred and enmity.'
We are liberated from personal likes and dislikes that limit our vision, and are able to go beyond ourselves."
Whether someone is a good pianist or not (apart from the sheer manual dexterity and fluency is a matter of opinion. I see no reason, and you have not offered any, to think that judgements as to whether someone is enlightened are not akin to aesthetic judgements, that is they are not matters amenable to precise determination, like judging one's knowledge of physics — Janus
Oh, for crying out loud. I want to know the truth about "spirituality". So far, the most plausible conclusion is that "spirituality" is a form of sublimation, specifically, of sublimating the Darwinian struggle for survival into terms that seem more palatable. — baker
From what I've seen, professional musicians believe that musical proficiency is amenable to precise determination.
Similar with the other arts. How else do you think they can write whole tomes of art criticism? — baker
If one disbelieves in rebirth, or lacks belief in rebirth, one acts as if though it doesn't exist. But one acts differently if one believes in rebirth, or considers it a possibility. — baker
By the way, if you are an admirer of Krishnamurti, who is against following any particular path, how would you reconcile this with your defense of Theravada Buddhism and personal preference for Mahāyāna Buddhism? — Apollodorus
It's not style, it's the content, the meaning.
— Wayfarer
To me, that sounds rather vague. — Apollodorus
I never said the Fabians and Theosophists were "the sole cause". I just disagree with the assessment that they "must rank a pretty long way down the list".
You didn't show why they "must" and didn't say who, in your opinion, would be at the top of the list. — Apollodorus
So far, the most plausible conclusion is that "spirituality" is a form of sublimation, specifically, of sublimating the Darwinian struggle for survival into terms that seem more palatable. — baker
Let's see what she says:
Compassion has been advocated by all the great faiths because it has been found to be the safest and surest means of attaining enlightenment.
No, it hasn't been advocated as such, certaintly not by "all the great faiths".
Mahayana emphasizes it, but not as "the safest and surest means of attaining enlightenment".
It dethrones the ego from the center of our lives and puts others there, breaking down the carapace of selfishness
That's idiot compassion.
And it gives us ecstasy, broadening our perspectives and giving us a larger, enhanced vision.
This describes zoning out.
As a very early Buddhist poem puts it: 'May our loving thoughts fill the whole world; above, below, across — without limit; a boundless goodwill toward the whole world, unrestricted, free of hatred and enmity.'
She should read the whole poem.
We are liberated from personal likes and dislikes that limit our vision, and are able to go beyond ourselves."
New Age talk.
There's a lot more I could say ... — baker
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.