Buddist on Catholic answers?

[eddie_too]

this is also a very peculiar budhhist teaching.

we do not know what nibbana is but we should aspire to reach it.

 

[eddie_too]

the buddha reached nibbana in this life and still his body decayed.

what good is reaching nibbana, whatever that is?

how does anyone know that the buddha reached nibbana since it had no apparent effect upon his life in this world?

 

[Grym]

based on the buddhists who have posted here, it seems fair to conclude that budhhism is understood in an entirely subjective manner. it has no agreed upon doctrines. it provides no authoratative teachings.

that is a huge difference from Roman Catholicism.

Everything is understood in and entirely subjective manner that is a trait of this world. Obviously even the message in the bible. Otherwise there would never be so many different sects in christianity? No?

Because the dhamma is testable, it is not arbirtatry. What is explained in the Dhamma can be tried and tested and verified by almost anybody. And all will come to the same conclusion.

The doctrine of buddhism is very clear. It is there in the four noble truths.

And it most definatley does not provide any authorative teaching. Which is one of the best things about buddhism and one that makes it appealing for me.

/Victor

 

[eddie_too]

no one and everyone speaks for buddhism.

i can think of few things more futile or meaningless than such a system.

try it you will like it i find equally unpersuasive or logical or reasonable or meaningful.

 

[Grym]

no one and everyone speaks for buddhism.

i can think of few things more futile or meaningless than such a system.

try it you will like it i find equally unpersuasive or logical or reasonable or meaningful.

Normally that kind of system is called Democracy and is considered the opposite to dictatorship.

And it is supposedly the only viable future for this world according to many in the west and east.

This is why buddhism is in favour today and christianity is waning.

/Victor

 

[rossum]

strangely, i love being alive and the idea of not being alive has no appeal to me.

You fear death, like most people. However, unless you are enlightened, your death will be followed by another birth and another death, which you will also fear. You are facing a very long time living in fear of death:

[The Buddha said:] What do you think, monks: Which is greater, the tears you have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time — crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — or the water in the four great oceans?"

“As we understand the Dhamma taught to us by the Blessed One, this is the greater: the tears we have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time — crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans.”

"Excellent, monks. Excellent. It is excellent that you thus understand the Dhamma taught by me.

“This is the greater: the tears you have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time — crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing — not the water in the four great oceans.”

– Assu sutta, Samyutta Nikaya 15.3

rossum

 

[eddie_too]

the only “death” i fear is separation from my Creator.

buddhists are the ones who fear death because they believe that they will be forced to live again in this sinful world, this vale of tears so to speak.

since i totally reject such a concept as unsupported by either reason or physical evidence, i do not have this fear that motivates buddhists.

there is no evidence that supports this belief. there is no reason to fear an unsupportable belief.

 

[rossum]

we do not know what nibbana is but we should aspire to reach it.

If you want to know what nirvana is, then follow the path to reach it. You can only know what something is like when you have been there. People who have not been to Hawaii do not know what it is like. All they have are pictures and descriptions. A picture of Hawaii is not Hawaii. A description of Hawaii is not Hawaii.

Here is a classic description of nirvana:

There is, monks, an unborn, an unbecome, an unmade, an unconditioned. If there were not that unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, no escape would be possible from the born, become, made, conditioned. But precisely because there is an unborn, unbecome, unmade, unconditioned, escape from the born, become, made, conditioned is possible.

– Udana 8.3

That is only a description, it is not nirvana. To get to nirvana you follow the path:

• avoid evil - follow the Ten Commandments.
• do good - “Love your neighbour as yourself.”
• meditate.

Christianity is good on the first two, but tends to lack many useful techniques for the third.

rossum

 

[Grym]

the only “death” i fear is separation from my Creator.

buddhists are the ones who fear death because they believe that they will be forced to live again in this sinful world, this vale of tears so to speak.

since i totally reject such a concept as unsupported by either reason or physical evidence, i do not have this fear that motivates buddhists.

there is no evidence that supports this belief. there is no reason to fear an unsupportable belief.

I do not really get you Eddie. Because most of the arguments you supply against buddhism are applicable to christianity as well and sometimes to much greater extent. Is it that you are blind to the beam in your own eye?

If not for fear of death then why is eternal life so appealing to you?

If reincarnation is unsupported then is exsitence of Heaven proven? It is not really is it.

And at the same time as the prospect of Heaven and eternal life is central to the christian faith. Reincarnation is not to the dhamma path.

In fact many westerners practising buddhism do not believe in reincarnation at all.

/Victor

 

[Grym]

If you want to know what nirvana is, then follow the path to reach it. You can only know what something is like when you have been there. People who have not been to Hawaii do not know what it is like. All they have are pictures and descriptions. A picture of Hawaii is not Hawaii. A description of Hawaii is not Hawaii.

rossum

It is my understanding that it is possible to get a taste of what it is like long before you are fully awakened.

Those who have done that is said never to stray from the Path.It is only then that you can begin to understand the dhamma for real. For such a one the desire to become fully awakened overpower all other desires.

/Victor

 

[Grym]

the buddha reached nibbana in this life and still his body decayed.

This is true. Still the dhamma is the path to deathlessness. How is that possible? Is that what you are asking?

Because the dhamma is the path to seeing through to how the self is born. When that is evident the self illusion falls and there is nolonger anything that can die. But of course the body will die eventually.

This explanation is not actually true at all but it will suffice for now.

what good is reaching nibbana, whatever that is?

End of mentally constructing the world in every moment. End of judgment. Final peace and final rest.

how does anyone know that the buddha reached nibbana since it had no apparent effect upon his life in this world?

If had a tremendous effect on his life and has an tremendous effect on the lifes of all that become awakened.

Practising the path properly has well described impacts on your everyday life. And your growth as a human being and how skillfully you lead your life.

/Victor

 

[Grym]

another, extraordinarily significant, difference is that while the founder of christianity left an empty grave thus confirming His victory over death, the body of the founder of buddhism ended up rotting in his grave.

This is a pretty interesting difference and a good example where buddhist knowleadge of the Other world can explain something that seems miraculous to christians.

Nibbana is the end of rebirth. Reincarnation is not that much of an miracle. It happens all the time to everyone.

Spontaneous rebirth as in the case of Jesus is not that commonplace here on earth but more so in the heavenly realms. So it would seem a miracle if it happened here.

/Victor

 

[ProdigalSun]

Ah but can you prove that? I mean logically?
Yes I beleive there is certainly a logical argument against for the fallacy of reincarnation. ** You certainly can not prove that it exsists in anyway. **

Ah but can you prove that? . Sounds pretty illogical to me, more like a James Bond movie. You only live twice? Eer btw does this mean* you do belive* in reincarnation?
Yes I’m sure it does seem illogical to you. anyone that sees logic in the illogical concept of reincarnation is bound to have a bit of disordered thinking!

And guess what. You are gonna get sick, grow old and die. Congrats for having such a generous God and just remember to say “Thank You God” next time you catch the flu.
I Thank God for all my misfortune as well as my fortune. Because I Love Jesus who is God and all that he does for me.

.

I mean whats logcal about that? Why not just skip to the part where you guys live forever in Eden? Live forever in Eden?

(Btw how about your Ma and Pa? Logically speaking I would say they had *something *to do with you being alive too?) Of course this is the way God has set up nature for procreation of our species. It certainly works quite well and is very pleasurable! Thank YOu God for this!

Cheers
Victor

Cheers To you Also:thumbsup:

 

[ProdigalSun]

Well because Christianity does not respect the animal life and nature the way Buddhism does is one of the reasons Buddhism is more logical than Christianity. That is a rediculous assumption and not logical at all!

Just look at what we are doing to the planet and animal farming is one of the big reasons the planet is going downhill. No it is not!
See I can make a statement too!

/Victor

 

[ProdigalSun]

I forgot to mention. It is not something made up that people in genereal spend more time longing for things they want rather than enjoying the things they have. Is it? This is because we are physiacally seperated from God. Our spirit longs to be with God. In a sense there is a void that we try to fill. Many people believe that if we fill that longing with things of this world it will stop the longing but it only works for a short time and then the void is back. We need to fill this ovid witht he things of God and that void certainly grows fuller giving us more Peace. Peace of Mind, Body, and Soul. This is how you stop the longing for things of this world.

/Victor

Peace!

 

[ProdigalSun]

Right, if I disagree with your views, I am ignorant or my knowledge is shallow. Well, as you say, this is not the thread to discuss slavery, extermination of heretics, or religious freedom.
As I indicated about slavery the same goes for the other two subjects. It is not very hard to learn about the truth what the church taught and still teaches about these subjects. They way you bring them up as some typoe of negative towards the church just shows your ingnorance of these subjects with regards to Church teaching. I’m not trying to be insulting and these are not my veiws but Church teaching. It is all fairly logical really.

I don’t know where God says anything. Any scripture text is merely someone who claims to speak on God’s behalf. I doubt they took dictation, but that is also a matter that could be the subject of another thread.

As for there being nothing “wrong” with killing animals. There are a couple points I can mention:

Empathy and compassion dictates that we should care about other living beings who experience suffering. Of course, if you lack empathy for cats, dogs, chickens, cows etc… there is absolutely nothing I can say that will change your mind. I guess Francis of Assisi who bought a lamb destined for slaughter, in order to save its life, was merely a sentimental fool…

The great “chain of being” where non-human animals are devalued when compared to humans, does not merely lead to all kinds of suffering for animals. It also leads to human suffering, because humans routinely dehumanize others in order to be able to kill or enslave them guilt free.

It happened with slavery throughout the middle ages and in the US: slaves were “less than human” and lacked a soul etc… Since they were seen as lower-than-human animals, it was ok to enslave or kill them. I happened during the second world war: Nazis literally conviced themselves that Jews were ratlike creatures who looked human, but were really not (they had human “accidents”, but the “substance” was “rat”, to use Catholic terminology). It happened during Rwanda. It happens with fetuses.

I recommend the following book which deals with the issue in depth:

amazon.com/Less-Than-Human-Enslave-Exterminate/dp/1250003830/

If we valued all sentient beings, dehumanization wouldn’t work. So I guess until we humans learn to value all living beings, capable of suffering, we will still continue killing and torturing each other.

I haven’t even begun addressing enviromental and human health concerns, and I won’t. You are not going to change your mind anyway. Since you a) Enjoy meat and animal products and b) Your favorite holy text scratches your itchy ears, telling you what you want to hear. Never mind that doctrinal development happens both within the Bible and throughout Church history.

At any rate, you are still responsible for what you choose to believe, and what authorities you choose to listen to.

This of course says nothing of why it is wrong to kill animals. It only talks of humans need to somehow justify they inhumane actions towards other humans. There is really no correlation to why it is wrong to Kill animals for food or even sport for that matter.

You Are right that I will not change my mind and beleive me when I say I am very aware of my responsibilties but I thak you for reminding me!

 

[ProdigalSun]

Are you really so lacking in knowledge of your own scriptures?
But whatsoever cheweth indeed the cud, and hath a hoof, but divideth it not, as the camel, and others, that you shall not eat, but shall reckon it among the unclean. The cherogrillus which cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof, is unclean. The hare also: for that too cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof. And the swine, which, though it divideth the hoof, cheweth not the cud. The flesh of these you shall not eat, nor shall you touch their carcasses, because they are unclean to you.

– Leviticus 11:4-8
That is a “way shape or form” in which God has condemned eating animals.

rossum

No it isn’t, for one it only condems a very small portion of animals. not all animals. Of course my second thought on the subject would be that you need to continue reading the bible to figure out what happens to the Dietary alws of the old testament. YOu have to jump ahead quite a ways though all the way into the New Testament.

 

[ProdigalSun]

Thank you for mentioning that. Here are a few other scriptures from the Bible:

Hosea 2:18
In that day I will make a covenant for them
with the beasts of the field, the birds in the sky
and the creatures that move along the ground.
Bow and sword and battle
I will abolish from the land,
so that all may lie down in safety.
Yes as soon as these things are abolished I will certainly have no need of meat I’m sure!

Psalm 36:6
Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains,
your judgments are like the great deep;
you save humans and animals alike, O Lord.
Of course he has to save the animals too. What else would the humans have to eat.

Jonah 3:7-9;4:11
Then he had a proclamation made in Nineveh: “By the decree of the king and his nobles: No human being or animal, no herd or flock, shall taste anything. They shall not feed, nor shall they drink water. Human beings and animals shall be covered with sackcloth, and they shall cry mightily to God. All shall turn from their evil ways and from the violence that is in their hands.(…) And should I not be concerned about Nineveh, that great city, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand persons who do not know their right hand from their left, and also many animals?” So you are saying we shouldn’t drink water either?

Proverbs 12:10
The righteous know the needs of their animals,
but the mercy of the wicked is cruel.

ops missed this one! Of course as the church teaches, we are to be great stewards of all our (us humans) gifts from our most awesome creator. We should never needlessly torture or hurt any animal. Any and all killing should be done as humanely as possible. We were given dominion over the earth but we should not waste or destroy that dominion.

Cheers:thumbsup:

 

[rossum]

No it isn’t, for one it only condems a very small portion of animals. not all animals.

Observe the shifting of the goalposts. In your original post, you talked about “animals”:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with killling animals for food and eating them. Show me where this has been condemed by God in anyway shape or form

Pigs are animal. God condemns the eating of pigs.

Having lost the original argument, you insert a new, previously unseen, qualifier: “all”.

Using your logic, then the commandment “You shall not kill” is meaningless, because not “all” killing is disallowed: self-defence etc. God does condemn killing, but He does not condemn all killing. It is also worth noting that God did not give animals to man for food until after the flood. Adam was only given plants to eat: Genesis 1:29. Prior to the flood, all meat eating was disallowed.

rossum

 

[ProdigalSun]

The point is the the Buddha did exactly what he set out to do. He succeeded. He was a man, and what he did, we can also do. It is within the power of man to follow in the Buddha’s path. Men are not gods, so it is fruitless for men to try to emulate gods. Better to stick to what we already know is possible, rather than to waste time attempting the impossible. What exactly did Buddha do? Can you prove to me that Buddha did exactly what you think Buddha did. I find it hard to believe because it happened so long ago. THe truths about what Buddha actually did is lost in history and what Buddists believe now has changed so much over time from different people bringing new and unheard of ideas and philospies.

You would do well to understand more of Buddhism. The point of Buddhism is to avoid rebirth. Being reborn – living again after death – is easy. The difficult thing is to avoid it. The Buddha succeeded, as do all those who attain nirvana before death. To a Buddhist, your loud proclamations that Jesus is alive merely show that Jesus did not attain nirvana. The Buddha is not alive precisely because he did attain nirvana. Do not assume that Buddhism is automatically the same as Christianity. Doing that will only lead you into error.

You can not prove that he was never reborn. Maybe if fooled himself as well as all of you and came back as a gnat! Maybe by now he has worked himself up to a 6 point elk. He could even be the one I have hanging on my wall. eeek!

rossum