Purpose of human life

What's this we ****, you got a mouse in your pocket? Show me one instance in this thread of me "lashing out" at you prior to your remark about feeling sorry for me. Telling you your claims are bullshit may not be pleasant for you, but it is not lashing out. If you don't make bullshit claims, nobody is going to tell you they're bullshit. Your Buddhist buddy JLN is the only one here who seems to have taken offense other than you.

You have missed some of my previous post:

I did say this and it's correct but you've chosen to ignore it. Am I the only one that has said you are like you plainly are? You live in a world of self delusion and as many others on this site have said in the past... I feel sorry for you.

Many others? Got any evidence of that? What is many, anyone else other than you? You have never "put up an argument against all [i've] said," The delusional one here is you, you're projecting. If you have indeed come up with any such "argument," it should be simplicity itself for you to quote it here, and link the post.

First, of course, you're going to need to describe this "all [i've] said and done in the past." I don't believe that will be easy for you, as it will entail you admitting that you take offense at being told that what you believe is bullshit, that your dog and pony show is just another religious delusion. It is that to which you really object.

Once again, if you don't post bullshit claims which you can't support, no one can call you on them.

This was your original post in this thread. It took pages of posts to get you to define what you allege is the root cause of suffering, and then to finally admit that the "traditional Buddhist" is only removing his own suffering, and not anyone else's. Therefore, it can hardly qualify as a universal description of the purpose of human life. It is having that pointed out to you that sticks in your craw. Telling you as much does not constitute "lashing out."

Whatever the case maybe with the human population, it does not matter when we talk about reproduction as being the purpose for human life. Sexual drives maybe natural in animals, but there is a big question mark why there is anything in the first place. It seems logical to have an answer to this question first before answering any sort of questions asking a purpose for something. Thus my ambivalence to any sort of justifying towards these types of questions.

I've already said (over and over) and you ignored it: is a driving instructor selfish if he tells you how to pass your test but admits he can't pass it for you. We are prepared to come back infinite times to tell others how to remove the root cause of suffering but it is impossible to do that for them (and we only help if they want it) just as a driving instructor doesn't knock on your door and ask to give you driving lessons he waits for you to ask.

You ignore everything that doesn't stop you from picking a fight with others.

You're here to vent your anger admit it.

@hamilton,
Well, aren't you ******* simon pure. Finn has been haunting web sites, looking to sucker people into getting in a fight with him since you were shitting in your short pants, little boy. I spew bile at those who spew it at me. Finn came here looking for trouble, i didn't hunt him down. I don't spew at those who leave me alone. You're pathetic.
URL: http://able2know.org/topic/173845-7

Oh by the way... Frank Apisa was the last one to say he was 'sorry for you' in his thread on agnostism.

The Dalai Lama has a Nobel Peace Prize he never says anything that isn't helpful and kind. He speaks only about peace and reconcilliation and you setanta hate him for this... boy are you f*****d up!

I was aware of Frank's comment, and, just as is the case with you, it's a passive-aggressive insult. So what? How does that constitute many? You're a fool if you think i'd waste enough emotion on you to be angry.

You're no cosmic driving instructor, no matter how many times you ask others if they have any questions. You have consistently failed to answer how your "enlightenment" is going to end the suffering of those with debilitating diseases, those who are starving, those who are beaten and abused, those who suffer the injustices of oppression. You simply will not address those questions, because you don't have an answer.

Siddartha had a pretty cushy gig. Coming from a relatively affluent background, he was never obliged to labor in the fields "from sun to sun" to feed himself. When he dreamed up his "enlightenment" dog and pony show he had it licked. He could sit around and dispense "wisdom," while others fed and clothed him. Buddhist monks have been pulling the same scam on the peasants ever since.

I've already brought this up and you have not addressed it. How is anyone supposed to spend their lives seeking enlightenment unless they already have the means of survival at hand? A peasant farmer who has to labor from sun to sun just to get the bare means to support himself and his family--how is he supposed to seek enlightenment? Is he supposed to run off and leave his family to starve? That would be increasing suffering in the world, not removing "the root cause."

I can teach any child over the age of 12 who is not physically disabled to drive a car in an afternoon. Several afternoons in a row and they'll be ready to pass a driving test. I don't claim to be a driving instructor, but you're attempting to make yourself out to be some sort of cosmic driving instructor who has all the answers to find enlightenment. Can you teach someone "enlightenment" in an afernoon? Can you teach them in a week? If not, how are they supposed to live while the seek enlightenment? Are you aware that most people in the world don't have 40 hour a week, well paid jobs which would leave them the leisure time to play at seeking enlightenment?

You have claimed that ignorance is the root cause of human suffering. How does ignorance cause debilitating disease? How is your enlightenment scam going to end disease, or even just the suffering from disease? How does ignorance cause starvation, or injustice? How is your enlightenment game going to end starvation, or injustice?

If there is any delusion here, it is your belief that you have all the answers. You have never addressed those questions, and i don't expect that you ever will.

Barak Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize. Theodore Roosevelt got the Nobel Peace Prize. Henry Kissinger got the Peace Prize. Yassar Arafat got the ******* Peace Prize, for christ's sake. It's not as though it's some sterling accomplishment. I don't hate the Dalai Lama, you have no idea who or what i hate, if anyone or anything. I'm simply unimpressed with a multi-millionaire refugee who prates about peace and love and cute little kittens while so many people in the world continue to suffer.

Of course I do if someone wants the answer; you just want a fight. So I'm stuck until someone who really wants to know and has an open-mind asks.

You don't think Buddhism has lasted for 2500 yrs with no god to blindly believe in would have survived if it couldn't answer such questions?

Also your other tack about the 'feudal system in Tibet', we all had them before democracy. We then embraced democracy as a better option which the Tibetans are now doing. They are just less politically advanced due to the harsh conditions as are some parts of Africa and some other underdeveloped countries... this has nothing to do with Buddhism and everything to do with evolution of systems being held back due to lack of material resources. Spiritually that is not the case.

As for people ignoring their religion in favor of greed etc.. well they are not following the Buddha's teachings. They just have some temporary power which they misuse. Not hard to understand unless you don't want to and you don't want to.

See my previous post. As for the rest you don't understand one thing about Buddhism. You have a western stereotyped view of it. The sort that 30 mins on Wiki would give you and then you misinterpret that. You hope that others don't realize this. And laughably you believe their silence means they agree with all the rubbish you spout. The Buddha gave up his wealth to live as a beggar in order to understand how to put an end to ALL beings suffering. Not that you'll listen to this correction of your view because you won't be able to vent your anger if you do.

Translation: You have no answer, so you're going to continue to dodge the questions.

Buddhism has survived for over 2000 years (whether or not there is a god is not relevant) the same way that all religions have survived, by gtulling the credulous. They still get the peasants to give up their hard earned food or cash so they can sit in the afternoon sun and spin their praryer wheels.

The harsh conditions in Tibet were being obliged to support about 6000 monasteries before 1950. There was no move on the part of any of your "enlightened" Buddhists, including the 13 previous Dalai Lamas to bring the blessings of democracy to Tibet. Your boy the Dalai Lama has a government in exile, none of the members of whom were chosen by a democratic process. I see no reason to expect that democracy plays any part in that boy's plans.

I understand greed and venality very well--such as the greed and venality of centuries of Buddhist monks who have stayed fat and happy with the food, clothing and shelter the peasants provided them.

You can dodge all you want, you have failed to explaing how Buddhism can remove your alleged "root cause" of suffering, when the suffering is occasioned by disease, starvation or injustice. Two thousand years of Buddhism has removed none of those causes of suffering. We can default to the one honest post you made here, in which you said that it can only remove the suffering of the practitioner--which only shows how smug, selfish and self-centered your religion is.

How can an impoverished peasant who works from sunrise to sunset to feed his family remove their suffering from hunger, disease or injustice through the practice of Buddhism? It's not like that's a hard question. I suspect the problem though, is that you have no answer.

In fact, it took instruction in Buddhism in the early 1970s. After more than a year, i was sufficiently unimpressed as to not waste my time further, because they couldn't answer those questions either. Siddartha understood how to end all suffering? How's that been working out for the world, huh? Not so good i see. Do you deny that others fed him, clothed him and provided for all his needs while he promulgated his religion? Do you think people are that stupid? You must have a very low opinion of the intelligence of others.

Those monks are the family members of those farmers. They weren't parachuted in. The president of the USA doesn't feed with his own hands the people of the US. He and the government local and federal organize that it happens. The monastery provided, education, health care, government, law, and love, compassion, wisdom, festivals to entertain, hope, moral guidance, all in the barren land of snows.

The Dalai Lama wants democracy and had said so. He wants an end to the system in Tibet because he recognizes that democracy is better for the modern world. He stepped down from politics which I've already told you but you again chose to ignore for you own petty reasons.

Your spin is just a blinkered view that allows you to get off on your anger towards others.

It is perfectly possible for someone who works fulltime to practice Buddhism. You don't have to be a monk. You probably know that but you again choose to ignore it because of your own hidden agenda... well not so hidden!

You didn't answer the question.

I'm not angry--you're not important to me.

To repeat, you didn't answer the question. Those Kagyu Buddhists back in the 1970s? They couldn't answer the question, either.

He (the Buddha) was a person with no possessions who was given only food and drink once a day before noon. He traveled India on foot after his enlightenment for 40 yrs until his death explaining how others could put and end or reduce temporarily their suffer.

You make up what promotes your hatred of Buddhism to hope to dupe others into believing you. You hope that you can get some misinformation by to damage it. As I said before I pity you.

You are ignoring all of my replies to suit your own misguided ends. You ask for an answer I give it you ignore it... then later you'll say the same thing again and accuse me of not answering it.

So,...

State a single question clearly and I'll see what I can do for others who might read this and have an open mind.

I already stated the question clearly, and you quoted it.

I don't hate Buddhism, or any other organized religious, bullshit scam. I'm just unimpressed.

No, you didn't answer the question. You rattled on about Buddhist monks whose families supported them, and the Dalai Lama, and democracy in Tibet. You drew false analogies to the United States. The one thing you didn't do was answer the question.

The question is not about Tibet, or the Dalai Lama, or Buddhist monks. It's a very simple question. You have not answered it.

How can an impoverished peasant who works from sunrise to sunset to feed his family remove their suffering from hunger, disease or injustice through the practice of Buddhism?

That's the question. It's straight forward and simple. You have not answered this question.