I am a Buddhist and if anyone wants to question my beliefs then they are welcome to do so...

@Frank Apisa,

Hi Frank, no I don't think you're being a wise-ass. What you say makes sense, but to test it I suggest that you meditate, that you examine your experience without assumptions and without attempting to change anything. Just to see what is happening, openly, honestly and patiently.

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Quote:

In that case we don't need Buddha

Buddhism needs the Buddha like a Budweiser needs a bottle. But like the beer, the message that is delivered has to be taken in. As they say, you are what you eat. In this context I guess the message would be ¨be the beer¨. Smile

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

Hi Frank, no I don't think you're being a wise-ass. What you say makes sense, but to test it I suggest that you meditate, that you examine your experience without assumptions and without attempting to change anything. Just to see what is happening, openly, honestly and patiently.

But I have,JL...WITHOUT ASSUMPTIONS...and I have come away with almost certainty that I do not know if the experiences are REALITY or an illusion.

I live my life as thought they are reality...that it is not an illusion. But minds like Einstein have supposed that reality MAY BE an illusion (a persistent one).

I suspect that unless I were to come to the conclusions that you have about experience...you would have difficulty accepting that I have been open, honest, and patient.

How could that be resolved?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I do not meditate in order to find some proof of the non-illusory nature of my experience. I just assume that most of my visions and sounds are not hallucinatory. They may be but that is not so much of a concern. I am concerned that I do not entertain ideological notions that are dangerous and foolish.
My principal concern is to realize my nature. And so far I see that I AM my experiences, not particular experiences, all my experienceas as they are occuring. Tat tvam asi: they are me; I am them.

1 Reply

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

I do not meditate in order to find some proof of the non-illusory nature of my experience. I just assume that most of my visions and sounds are not hallucinatory. They may be but that is not so much of a concern. I am concerned that I do not entertain ideological notions that are dangerous and foolish.
My principal concern is to realize my nature. And so far I see that I AM my experiences, not particular experiences, all my experienceas as they are occuring. Tat tvam asi: they are me; I am them.

But JL...you asked me to test something.

You asked me to test if my "experience" is illusionary or not.

Here is the specific to which you asked me to test:

Quote:

And if you are willing to accept that what you "experience" may be illusionary...you will be in dynamite shape without the Buddha, without Buddhism, and without kidding yourself that you truly know anything about REALITY other than that you appear to be "experiencing" something.

How do you test that?

You are not testing it...you are making one of the assumptions you asked me not to make.

You are assuming that the reality you suggest exists because of what you experience...has to be the REALITY.

But you cannot test that...or at least, there is no way that I can see to test it.

Simply "meditating" with what you call "an open mind" and with what you call "no assumptions"...

...MAY BE meditating with a mind completely closed to the possibility that what we "experience" is not the REALITY...and with assumptions that our "experience" is the REALITY.

I am totally open minded on this, JL.

I am saying that what we experience MAY BE the REALITY.

But I am also saying that it MAY NOT BE the REALITY at all.

It may be an illusion.

I cannot think of a way to truly test it...and I think your suggestion is a sure way not to make an open-minded, non-assuming test of it.

Do you have any valid suggestions on how to test it?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

But I have,JL...WITHOUT ASSUMPTIONS...and I have come away with almost certainty that I do not know if the experiences are REALITY or an illusion.

Why can't it be both? If you can't tell the difference between something real and something illusory, is there a difference?

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Quote:
But I have,JL...WITHOUT ASSUMPTIONS...and I have come away with almost certainty that I do not know if the experiences are REALITY or an illusion.

Why can't it be both? If you can't tell the difference between something real and something illusory, is there a difference?

It can be one...or the other...or both...or neither.

I honestly do not know which it is.

If I cannot tell the difference...it may not make any difference to ME...but that does not necessary have any impact on the REALITY.

I am searching for the REALITY (I suspect I will not find it)...and RL is telling me what he thinks the REALITY actually is.

I am questioning it.

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

C'mon . .
Are you saying this Buddha's for you?

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Then all is well.
I don't know either. I think that Buddhism, at least in part, is about learning to live with the suspense of not knowing rather than to invent answers for oneself.

1 Reply

Frank, as usual we are talking past one another. By "test" I had another meaning in mind. I am only concerned to know my nature and that is the result of meditation. Science is our attempt to study the world (including ourselves as "objective" organisms and social creatures); meditation is our attempt to study ourselves as "subjective" experiential phenomena/ beings.

0 Replies

This book seems to indicate that Buddhism is all about finding happiness-

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/The_Art_of_Happiness.jpg~original

Whereas Christianity is all about learning to roll with the punches life throws at us on this testing ground called earth- "All creation groans in pain from the beginning til now" (Romans 8:22)
Jesus said- "Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:27)
"Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life.." (James 1:12)

So yeah i think I'd prefer to string with Christianity and hack it like a man, waddya say Bob?
"Right, take the pain! TAKE THE PAIN"

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/Barnes.jpg

0 Replies

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Then all is well.
I don't know either. I think that Buddhism, at least in part, is about learning to live with the suspense of not knowing rather than to invent answers for oneself.

I'm all for living with the suspense of not knowing.

But some people here are intimating that they DO KNOW.

Therefore...the discussion.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank, as a commited agnostic I can see that not knowing--at least in religion--is not a problem for you ( or for me for that matter). But I think Cyracuz' comment has to do with a more general ability not to need to shield oneself from direct experience (existential ignorance?) behind abstractions, categories, and models-or at least to have the security to accept such protective constructs as human-made artifacts.

2 Replies

@JLNobody,

JLNobody wrote:

Frank, as a commited agnostic I can see that not knowing--at least in religion--is not a problem for you ( or for me for that matter). But I think Cyracuz' comment has to do with a more general ability not to need to shield oneself from direct experience (existential ignorance?) behind abstractions, categories, and models-or at least to have the security to accept such protective constructs as human-made artifacts.

Can you make that a bit easier to understand? I do not understand what you are trying to say there.

0 Replies

@JLNobody,

What I am thinking regarding this is that no matter how you relate to the world you perceive, there will neccesarily be assumptions and unfounded beliefs, simply because they serve a function.

We do not automatically know about these assumptions and unfounded beliefs. Sometimes they are so fundamental to our way of thinking that it doesn't even occur to us that it is possible to question them.

A good example of this is the materialists who are unable to conceive of reality as "non-physical". To many people (none I have seen in this thread) the idea is as ridiculous as breathing in a vacuum.

As I see it, the main benefit of buddhism and similar philosophies is that it seeks to examine perception itself, rather than that which is perceived.
It is this process that helps us identify to ourselves the aspects of our worldview that cause us to form attachments to beliefs and assumptions that would otherwise be invisible to us.

0 Replies

http://able2know.org/topic/220485-37#post-5444634

1 Reply

@igm,

igm wrote:

http://able2know.org/topic/220485-37#post-5444634

Agnostics do not sit on the fence...and I, for certain, do not sit on the fence.

It is apparent that Buddhism is just another religion...filled with "beliefs."

Nothing wrong with that.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

I do not like to call Buddhism a religion. It does not seek to explain the origin of the universe, or claim its doctrines are handed down from divinity.

The way I see it, Buddhism is more like martial arts for the mind.

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

I do not like to call Buddhism a religion.

I understand that...and respect your right to feel that way.

I, however, see it as a religion.

If you feel more comfortable with "belief system"...I am willing to accept that, although if you were to look up religions on the Internet, Buddhism will show up.

Quote:

It does not seek to explain the origin of the universe, or claim its doctrines are handed down from divinity.

No...but it does rely on lots and lots of "beliefs."

Quote:

The way I see it, Buddhism is more like martial arts for the mind.

Okay. But I see it as relying on too many "beliefs" to qualify that way.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

What beliefs?

1 Reply

I am a Buddhist and if anyone wants to question my beliefs then they are welcome to do so...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know