Is Buddhism a religion?

Spirituality Religion
#104

Buddhism: What continues are the elements that constitute the self, they are recycled and form a new self, and then that new self ceased the next moment and a new self is recycled and so on until you achieive nirvana and become completely extinguished and attain the void.

Why would anyone want this?

Why is this no more depressing than the athiest’s belief that all we are is matter and that our atoms are dissipated and eventually form new substances, become parts of other people, etc.?

Just to be clear, and if you could answer the question I asked ten times, this would mean that there is absolutely no continuity of conciousness and memory. There is no connection with the new self to the old self. There would be no communication with friends and family who had died and reached this state. They would not be recognized or known.

#105

[QUOTE=thomas;42582]Why would anyone want this?

[/QUOTE]

Interestingly there are Buddhist that would ask the same question about Christianity.

But you also have to understand there are different types of Buddhism and they do not all agree 100%. A Tibetan Buddhist will not completely agree with a Chan/Zen Buddhist and a Pure Land Buddhism will not completely agree with either of them.

So when you ask a question about Buddhism it is best to ask what sect the person answering is talking about. Many answer based on a view of Tibetan Buddhism and other based on Zen and other based on…

I tend towards Chan because I have family that are Chan Buddhist… but I also have family that are Pure Land Buddhists and I am trying to understand them as well.

#106

May I ask what you believe, Yulaw?

Do you believe there is a continuity of consciousness from this life to the life after death and that in some way you remain the same person and retain your memory from this life?

Do you believe you would be able to communicate with others in this state, and if you knew them in this life would recognize them somehow in the next?

#107

[QUOTE=thomas;42587]May I ask what you believe, Yulaw?

[/QUOTE]

You may ask…

#108

Hahahaha…Yulaw, naughty…Thomas will be pulling his hair out at this…are you Thomas???

#109

Surya…youve missed out a ton from any school of thought in Buddhism xx but at least you have tried, all 2 lines, for a learner…xx

#110

This is why I said Buddhism is a death-religion. We Indians realised what Buddhism was, and we rejected it for the life religion of Hinduism. At one stage all of India had become Buddhist, because the emperor Asoka had adopted Buddhism. Unfortunately, it is during this period that Indian suffered a highest amount of decline and became increasingly pacificist and inactive(like any country that adopted Buddhism) Thanks, to the Hindu sage adisankarcharya, Hinduism was once again revived in India and Buddhists in India recoverted to Hinduism. Incidentally, the period when Hinduism was revived in India is known by historians as the golden age of India, where massive progress was made in engineering, architecture, science, technology.

This is not the entire story though on Buddhism. As I said earlier, and as Yulaw alluded, there are other sects of Buddhism which believe other things, but the belief in an enduring self is only in the Mahayana school of Buddhism, which is basically a Hindu inspired sect of Buddhism. They are not considered orthodox in Buddhism though. In the same way Chrisitian gnosticism is not considered orthodox.

Hinduism is a life religion because it embraces and celeberates life in all its forms and modalities and does not deny desire. The aim in Hinduism is not to escape from the world, but to become a better person in all areas of your life and to become a better and more advanced society. We promote progress and this is why we have had the most progressive civilisation on earth, with immense contributions to science, technology, arts and philosophy. It is also why we have so many festivals to celeberate everything. We easily are the most colourful religion in the world.

#111

This is why I said Buddhism is a death-religion

You cant imagine that anything could be more right than what is on this earth, or a heaven like place afar, and what you think…we make allowances for all the suffering, saying eternally, things will change, they wont. Different era, different century, different Masters, different inventions, different lives, but essential problems stay…murder, pain, lies, suffering, anger, jealousy, ego, crying, fear of death, illness, cruelty etc…these thing will never change, never…what Buddhism tells you is there is a perfect state, but its not here. And we cant handle that…talk to people who have had near death experiences…they didn’t want to come back, they consciously experienced love like they never knew in its greatness, before. This is because they were not attached, momentarily to this human state we seek to maintain so preciously is right.

#112

what Buddhism tells you is there is a perfect state, but its not here

It tells you that there is a perfect state called nirvana which is total nothingness/void, but no enjoyer to enjoy it.

Stop confusing your new-age stuff with the Buddhist stuff. It is easy to see how you take a bit of everything, mix it up, add your own slant to it and then present this undigestible item to everybody. We are talking about the religion of Buddhism here, not the new-age religion. So only answer questions on Buddhism if you have sufficient knowledge on Buddhism, else keep quiet on the matter.

#113

[QUOTE=Surya Deva;42607]It tells you that there is a perfect state called nirvana which is total nothingness/void, but no enjoyer to enjoy it.

Stop confusing your new-age stuff with the Buddhist stuff. It is easy to see how you take a bit of everything, mix it up, add your own slant to it and then present this undigestible item to everybody. We are talking about the religion of Buddhism here, not the new-age religion. So only answer questions on Buddhism if you have sufficient knowledge on Buddhism, else keep quiet on the matter.[/QUOTE]

Ha you crack me up Surya…I am but a humble learner, stated so, so many times, what I put is accurate, from Buddhist teachings, Tibetan…and his holiness the 14th Dalai Lama…

I have already stated on this thread I wouldn’t like to mislead anyone with my opinion (dont you actually read peoples posts Surya, are you all mouth n trousers :wink: ) because I am learning about Buddhism…[B].so you are aiming this at the person who has stated this…His Holiness The 14th Dalai Lama[/B] its from a book…:grin:
You need to direct this to him, not me…ahum:D…knowing you, you probably would ha! you being in top 1% of spiritual knowledge like…

Love from your
New Age, 21st century Buddhist Books Reader:eek:

#114

OK, Thomas, here is my take on Nirvana.

Nirvana is beyond space and beyond time. Another dimension. No concept of self and not-self. It is infinite. Nirvana actually means to extinguish. So it’s extinguishment of life as we know it. The eternal state of being, karma and rebirth come to an end. It is profound happiness. We are one with all. We are all. We are happy because there are no more attachments.

You know what it’s like as a christian to try to imagine God and heaven? I know I tried for years. Every time I tried to imagine God and infinity, I almost could grasp it, but alas it left. Well, it is the same with Nirvana. The Buddha cautioned us that humans don’t have the words to describe it. But this is how I choose to look at it. As mentioned earlier, there are many sects in Buddhism and each believes in Nirvana a bit differently.

As far as the self and does it continue and are there memories? Well, yes, if you are reborn. You may have vague or clear memories and impressions of who you were, etc. Much has to do with Karma. Some who have reached Nirvana in this life, are living in pure bliss, giving of themselves in service to fellow man. When one dies, it is pure speculation to be honest. But most agree, as do I, that you become one with The Absolute. One with all.

#115

Nirvana is beyond space and beyond time. Another dimension. No concept of self and not-self. It is infinite. Nirvana actually means to extinguish. So it’s extinguishment of life as we know it. The eternal state of being, karma and rebirth come to an end. It is profound happiness. We are one with all. We are all. We are happy because there are no more attachments.

How can there be no self and there be happiness? Who is the one who is being happy if there is no self?

How can a person be “all”? If I reach Nirvana and you reach Nirvana and Joe Blo reaches Nirvana, then are there three who are happy? If so, then there is not true “oneness,” and if not, then someone isn’t happy, because someone no longer exists.

And how is this concept of Nirvana not of a religion but of science?

#116

But most agree, as do I, that you become one with The Absolute. One with all.

One with God? Is God the Absolute?

When I die, my body will become one with the earth, but that’s not something to write home about, and is nothing to look forward to. And it’s no more attactive a concept that my mind and whatever elements there are to my spiritual nature would dissolve and become one somehow with an unseen realm.

If I believed that were my destiny, I would be totally depressed and full of despair. How can this end be seen as happiness?

I would not mind being one with all like a fish is one with the ocean. But I would not want to be one with the ocean like a cup of water poured into the ocean would be.

The Apostle Paul say that in God we live, move, and have our being. From the Christian perspective, we are and always will be a separate thing, but there is still a “oneness,” but one of uniting, and not one of annihilation as seems to be with the belief as stated here.

#117

How can there be no self and there be happiness? Who is the one who is being happy if there is no self?

You are no longer attached to trying to achieve it. It comes as a result of letting go of attachments. It is a natural state of being. Total bliss.

When I die, my body will become one with the earth, but that’s not something to write home about, and is nothing to look forward to. And it’s no more attactive a concept that my mind and whatever elements there are to my spiritual nature would dissolve and become one somehow with an unseen realm.

In Buddhism, the body matters not. We are all a part of the whole. We are not the whole. Imagine a bicycle. Take the gears for instance. Are the gears the bicycle? No. But they do however make up part of the bicycle. The gears, along with the spokes, wheels, etc. make up the bicycle. Separately they are not the bicycle, but together they make it up. This is how Buddhists view existence. We are not separate. We are a part of everything.

The Apostle Paul say that in God we live, move, and have our being. From the Christian perspective, we are and always will be a separate thing, but there is still a “oneness,” but one of uniting, and not one of annihilation as seems to be with the belief as stated here

And from a Buddhist perspective, we are not separate. It is not annihilation Thomas. This is a misconception. When we see ourselves separately, there is ego attached. We define ourselves by this and that. We need to shed this and that. We see ourselves as a part of a much bigger picture. There is no end. We are constantly changing. Nothing is permanent. Our bodies are not permanent. They are just a vehicle. They dissolve, when we die, to become once again part of everything. I think this is a beautiful way to look at life and death. Once we no longer cling to life (usually the final attachment) we are able to end the cycle of rebirth and achieve our ultimate goal of bliss or Nirvana. We no longer try to find ‘things’ to bring us happiness. Happiness comes naturally. We just are happy without trying.

Again Thomas, The Buddha has cautioned us from trying to articulate exactly what Nirvana is. He said we cannot, as humans, put it into words. Much like Christianity when you reach Heaven. Do you know heaven? You can imagine what it may be like, but it is difficult at best to try to explain.

How can a person be “all”? If I reach Nirvana and you reach Nirvana and Joe Blo reaches Nirvana, then are there three who are happy? If so, then there is not true “oneness,” and if not, then someone isn’t happy, because someone no longer

If all three of the above reached Nirvana, for them it is bliss. And again, you are trying to dissect this too much. Of the three, if they reached Nirvana. not one of them are without bliss. No one is unhappy as they’ve reached their goal. Existence is not permanent. If we were unhappy because we no longer exist, we would not have reached Nirvana.

#118

I think one thing has been cleared up in this thread from the very religious views of the Buddhists writing here and their apologies for its doctrines, that Buddhism is most definitely a religion.

#119

In general we have also found in this thread that no Buddhist here really believes in the anatman doctrine, but merely pay lip service to it. They all believe in the continuation of a self, insist that we continue to exist to enjoy the perfect state called nirvana. They are not really representative of Buddhism, but more representative of new age religion.

How can a person be “all”? If I reach Nirvana and you reach Nirvana and Joe Blo reaches Nirvana, then are there three who are happy? If so, then there is not true “oneness,” and if not, then someone isn’t happy, because someone no longer

This argument also appears in Hindu philosophy. If there was only just one person, then as soon as one person had reached enlightenment, everybody would become enlightened. If one person is happy, everybody should be happy. If one person is unhappy, everybody should be unhappy. However, clearly this is not the case, thus proving that there are individual souls, each on their own journey.

#120

And you got your summation how? Your summation of what has been said is clearly not what has been said.

#121

It is clear for any objective reader to see Lotusgirl. I know you do not believe in the anatman doctrine really, form our previous discussion about your husband.

#122

My husband is not the same person who earned that degree many years ago. He has changed, like all of life. Moment by moment. That piece of paper is only that. What he has is knowledge. That knowledge changes from moment to moment. That knowledge trumps the piece of paper. The paper is materialistic at this point. My husband has never defined who he is by what he has achieved. Did he work his butt of to get that degree? Yes. But that moment has passed and he is no longer the same person who worked his butt off. Does that take away the knowledge? Nope!

You don’t lose what you know. It becomes part of a larger perspective with experience.

#123

If he is not the same person as the one that got the degree and the one that you married, then who is the man that holds the degree now and you are married too and share intimate moments with? Clearly you believe it is the same man and clearly his employers also believe he is the same man.

We know there is a continuation of self from memory. I remember myself to be the same person as the person that existed a few moments ago whilst beginning the composition of this post, as the person who joined this forum a few months ago, as the person who went out last weekend and partied, as the person who was born 30 years ago to my parents. As the person whose gone through several experiences in life, the good, the bad and the ugly. I remember most of the people I met and they remember me and would recognise me. I remember most of the 30 years of my life. Therefore clearly I am the same person.

But here is what has changed over the 30 years of my life. My body has changed many times. I was fat and short when I was born, then I became skinny and short, then I became skinny and tall, then I became toned and tall, then I became average and tall with a slight beer bellly :wink: My mind has changed many times. I was born with no beliefs, no knowledge. I then learned to walk and talk. Then I went to school and I learned to read and write. Then I went to high school, and I learned Science, English, Maths, French, Geography, PE, Music. I then went to college and I learned advanced science, advanced maths and advanced computing. I then went to university and I learned Philosophy and Logic. In terms of beliefs I was born Sikh, I went to the temple with my parents and prayed to god. Then I left Sikhism and became an atheist. Then I rejected atheism and became a spiritualist. Then I reject spiritualism and became a Hindu.

I am still the same person, but my body and mind has changed. To say this means I am not the same person is bordering on idiocy.