Theism, Atheism, Non-Theism

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

Again the eight fold path is not to be taken as the commandment do this or you are wrong.

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

Again the eight fold path is not to be taken as the commandment do this or you are wrong.

What does that matter? If you are ever going to be enlightened those are the steps, right? You can't do the opposite of those things and expect to become enlightened, right?

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

You don't seem to realize that many practicing Buddhists do not subscribe to the whole rebirth thing as meaning anything more than the atoms in your body return to the earth to be used again.

You seem to think that Buddhism is full of absolutes like Christianity and it isn't.

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Again those are translations and we all know that more is lost in translation than is conveyed. You are hung up on the words in English not the words they were translated from. Again the Eight Fold Path is not a set of commandments. I can just as easily use the term "correct" instead of" right "

Right and wrong are human concepts therefore they are impermanent and no attachments to them are necessary.

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Just looking at the English translation, viz. "Right", one could say it is the opposite of wrong - like, one should practice "Right Mindfulness" and not "Wrong Mindfulness". This "Right - Wrong" also lends itself to be looked as "Good - Bad". Often, referring back to the Pali or Sanskrit word gives us a better understanding of the english translation. For example, Right Mindfulness in Pali is "samma-sati". The Pali word "samma" has a wide range of meanings: right/rightly, perfect/perfectly, full/fully, complete/completely, through/throughly, proper/properly. Why was "right" chosen in preference to the other possible English words? What about "Proper mindfulness" or "Perfect Mindfulness"?

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

You don't seem to realize that many practicing Buddhists do not subscribe to the whole rebirth thing as meaning anything more than the atoms in your body return to the earth to be used again.

You seem to think that Buddhism is full of absolutes like Christianity and it isn't.

So Buddha was lying about remembering his previous lives?

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Again those are translations and we all know that more is lost in translation than is conveyed. You are hung up on the words in English not the words they were translated from. Again the Eight Fold Path is not a set of commandments. I can just as easily use the term "correct" instead of" right "

Right and wrong are human concepts therefore they are impermanent and no attachments to them are necessary.

In your studies, for any one of the eight paths, were you taught that some behaviors were acceptable and some behaviors were not acceptable and can you provide an example of each and the reasoning behind why one was acceptable and another was not acceptable?

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Just looking at the English translation, viz. "Right", one could say it is the opposite of wrong - like, one should practice "Right Mindfulness" and not "Wrong Mindfulness". This "Right - Wrong" also lends itself to be looked as "Good - Bad". Often, referring back to the Pali or Sanskrit word gives us a better understanding of the english translation. For example, Right Mindfulness in Pali is "samma-sati". The Pali word "samma" has a wide range of meanings: right/rightly, perfect/perfectly, full/fully, complete/completely, through/throughly, proper/properly. Why was "right" chosen in preference to the other possible English words? What about "Proper mindfulness" or "Perfect Mindfulness"?

So any conduct could be the right conduct to achieve enlightenment? What about if I decided to take any woman I wanted, would that be an acceptable conduct to become enlightened?

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

You don't seem to realize that many practicing Buddhists do not subscribe to the whole rebirth thing as meaning anything more than the atoms in your body return to the earth to be used again.

You seem to think that Buddhism is full of absolutes like Christianity and it isn't.

So Buddha was lying about remembering his previous lives?

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

I don't know if he was lying. but the Buddha was just a man and not some god giving orders to people how to live.

And I do not have to believe in past lives as a requirement in order to engage in any Buddhist practices.

YOU have to believe what you are told to believe because YOU have to think that the god you worship is infallible.

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Just looking at the English translation, viz. "Right", one could say it is the opposite of wrong - like, one should practice "Right Mindfulness" and not "Wrong Mindfulness". This "Right - Wrong" also lends itself to be looked as "Good - Bad". Often, referring back to the Pali or Sanskrit word gives us a better understanding of the english translation. For example, Right Mindfulness in Pali is "samma-sati". The Pali word "samma" has a wide range of meanings: right/rightly, perfect/perfectly, full/fully, complete/completely, through/throughly, proper/properly. Why was "right" chosen in preference to the other possible English words? What about "Proper mindfulness" or "Perfect Mindfulness"?

So any conduct could be the right conduct to achieve enlightenment? What about if I decided to take any woman I wanted, would that be an acceptable conduct to become enlightened?

Again with the rape fantasies.

The Eight fold path is the path of compassion. The Middle Way of the Eight fold Path is not unlike Aristotle's Golden Mean.

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

You don't seem to realize that many practicing Buddhists do not subscribe to the whole rebirth thing as meaning anything more than the atoms in your body return to the earth to be used again.

You seem to think that Buddhism is full of absolutes like Christianity and it isn't.

So Buddha was lying about remembering his previous lives?

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

I don't know if he was lying. but the Buddha was just a man and not some god giving orders to people how to live.

And I do not have to believe in past lives as a requirement in order to engage in any Buddhist practices.

YOU have to believe what you are told to believe because YOU have to think that the god you worship is infallible.

But I don't always believe what I am told.

How do you reconcile (in your mind) Buddha's craziness with his genius? I mean here you are practicing something taught by a crazy person who thinks he lived past lives, right?

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Just looking at the English translation, viz. "Right", one could say it is the opposite of wrong - like, one should practice "Right Mindfulness" and not "Wrong Mindfulness". This "Right - Wrong" also lends itself to be looked as "Good - Bad". Often, referring back to the Pali or Sanskrit word gives us a better understanding of the english translation. For example, Right Mindfulness in Pali is "samma-sati". The Pali word "samma" has a wide range of meanings: right/rightly, perfect/perfectly, full/fully, complete/completely, through/throughly, proper/properly. Why was "right" chosen in preference to the other possible English words? What about "Proper mindfulness" or "Perfect Mindfulness"?

So any conduct could be the right conduct to achieve enlightenment? What about if I decided to take any woman I wanted, would that be an acceptable conduct to become enlightened?

Again with the rape fantasies.

The Eight fold path is the path of compassion. The Middle Way of the Eight fold Path is not unlike Aristotle's Golden Mean.

You dodged the question.

But apparently you believe in compassion, right? Isn't compassion a man made thing too? What's wrong with being cruel? Is cruel wrong or bad or evil?

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

You don't seem to realize that many practicing Buddhists do not subscribe to the whole rebirth thing as meaning anything more than the atoms in your body return to the earth to be used again.

You seem to think that Buddhism is full of absolutes like Christianity and it isn't.

So Buddha was lying about remembering his previous lives?

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

I don't know if he was lying. but the Buddha was just a man and not some god giving orders to people how to live.

And I do not have to believe in past lives as a requirement in order to engage in any Buddhist practices.

YOU have to believe what you are told to believe because YOU have to think that the god you worship is infallible.

But I don't always believe what I am told.

How do you reconcile (in your mind) Buddha's craziness with his genius? I mean here you are practicing something taught by a crazy person who thinks he lived past lives, right?

I don't have to reconcile anything. The Buddha was just a man and susceptible to to the fallibility of men. He is not and never claimed to be all powerful all knowing.

Does that fallibility negate the entire volume of his teachings?

And once again I'll explain to you that I have taken some of the Buddha's teachings along with some of the teachings of the classical Stoics along with some of the teachings of Aristotle and Socrates and even a little Thomas Aquinas among many others and incorporated them into my own philosophy.

As I have said there are may roads to any great city.

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Just looking at the English translation, viz. "Right", one could say it is the opposite of wrong - like, one should practice "Right Mindfulness" and not "Wrong Mindfulness". This "Right - Wrong" also lends itself to be looked as "Good - Bad". Often, referring back to the Pali or Sanskrit word gives us a better understanding of the english translation. For example, Right Mindfulness in Pali is "samma-sati". The Pali word "samma" has a wide range of meanings: right/rightly, perfect/perfectly, full/fully, complete/completely, through/throughly, proper/properly. Why was "right" chosen in preference to the other possible English words? What about "Proper mindfulness" or "Perfect Mindfulness"?

So any conduct could be the right conduct to achieve enlightenment? What about if I decided to take any woman I wanted, would that be an acceptable conduct to become enlightened?

Again with the rape fantasies.

The Eight fold path is the path of compassion. The Middle Way of the Eight fold Path is not unlike Aristotle's Golden Mean.

You dodged the question.

But apparently you believe in compassion, right? Isn't compassion a man made thing too? What's wrong with being cruel? Is cruel wrong or bad or evil?

I never said all human concepts are worthless. If you think I have then quote the post.

I have said that morality is relative, the concepts of good and evil are relative and those concepts changed over time.

And our society has conflicting ideas on cruelty just as it does on killing.

But you deny this. I don't. In fact I accept it as reality where as the ideal is fantasy.

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Just looking at the English translation, viz. "Right", one could say it is the opposite of wrong - like, one should practice "Right Mindfulness" and not "Wrong Mindfulness". This "Right - Wrong" also lends itself to be looked as "Good - Bad". Often, referring back to the Pali or Sanskrit word gives us a better understanding of the english translation. For example, Right Mindfulness in Pali is "samma-sati". The Pali word "samma" has a wide range of meanings: right/rightly, perfect/perfectly, full/fully, complete/completely, through/throughly, proper/properly. Why was "right" chosen in preference to the other possible English words? What about "Proper mindfulness" or "Perfect Mindfulness"?

So any conduct could be the right conduct to achieve enlightenment? What about if I decided to take any woman I wanted, would that be an acceptable conduct to become enlightened?

Again with the rape fantasies.

The Eight fold path is the path of compassion. The Middle Way of the Eight fold Path is not unlike Aristotle's Golden Mean.

You dodged the question.

But apparently you believe in compassion, right? Isn't compassion a man made thing too? What's wrong with being cruel? Is cruel wrong or bad or evil?

I never said all human concepts are worthless. If you think I have then quote the post.

I have said that morality is relative, the concepts of good and evil are relative and those concepts changed over time.

And our society has conflicting ideas on cruelty just as it does on killing.

But you deny this. I don't. In fact I accept it as reality where as the ideal is fantasy.

I never said you said all human concepts are worthless. If you think I have then quote the post.

If you don't believe that right and wrong exist independent of man than you have no basis for saying compassion leads to enlightenment anymore than you have for saying cruelty leads to enlightenment.

I am the one that has been arguing that standards exist for logical reasons. I am trying to show you that you believe compassion leads to enlightenment because of logical reasons. That not all behaviors lead to equal outcomes. That some behaviors lead to better outcomes and some behaviors lead to worse outcomes. Such that right and wrong cannot be defined by what man wants them to be but by what logic dictates they be.

 

[ding]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

I disagree. Samsara proves otherwise. Samsara proves that Buddhists do believe in eternal spirits. When the body dies the mind or spirit moves on and continues to move on eternally or until the body and mind or spirit reaches its spiritual awakening or enlightenment. Samsara also disproves that the body and mind or spirit are one as the body dies but the mind or spirit goes on to live again in a new body.

Depending on the actions performed in previous lives, rebirth could be as a human or animal or even ghosts, demi-gods, or gods. Being born as a human is seen by Buddhists as a rare opportunity to work towards escaping this cycle of samsara. The escape from samsara is called Nirvana or enlightenment.​

​

Once Nirvana is achieved, and the enlightened individual physically dies, Buddhists believe that they will no longer be reborn.​

​

The Buddha taught that when Nirvana is achieved, Buddhists are able to see the world as it really is. Nirvana means realising and accepting the Four Noble Truths and being awake to reality.​

​

Some Buddhists believe that enlightened individuals can choose to be reborn in order to help others become enlightened. Others believe that, when Nirvana is achieved, the cycle of samsara, all suffering and further existence for that individual itself ends.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

It doesn't matter if some Buddhists believed in eternal spirits. That belief is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

There is no enduring essence or self

The self is an idea, a mental construct. That is not only the Buddha’s experience, but the experience of each realized Buddhist man and woman from 2,500 years ago to the present day. That being the case, what is it that dies? There is no question that when this physical body is no longer capable of functioning, the energies within it, the atoms and molecules it is made up of, don’t die with it. They take on another form, another shape. You can call that another life, but as there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. Quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next.

Dude, you don't even acknowledge right and wrong when the eight fold path is predicated on right and wrong. So why would you think you would understand what Buddha meant by enlightement?

The Buddha taught his disciples not to fear death. This has been interpreted by Buddhists as suggesting that if they live well, their rebirth will be good.​

​

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

You don't seem to realize that many practicing Buddhists do not subscribe to the whole rebirth thing as meaning anything more than the atoms in your body return to the earth to be used again.

You seem to think that Buddhism is full of absolutes like Christianity and it isn't.

So Buddha was lying about remembering his previous lives?

After his enlightenment, the Buddha could remember his previous lives. Some of these previous lives are recorded in the Buddhist scripture, the Jakata.​

What does Buddhism teach about life after death? - Life after death - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - BBC Bitesize

Learn about samsara and nirvana and how Buddhists believe we can influence what happens to us when we die with BBC Bitesize GCSE Religious Studies.

www.bbc.co.uk

I don't know if he was lying. but the Buddha was just a man and not some god giving orders to people how to live.

And I do not have to believe in past lives as a requirement in order to engage in any Buddhist practices.

YOU have to believe what you are told to believe because YOU have to think that the god you worship is infallible.

But I don't always believe what I am told.

How do you reconcile (in your mind) Buddha's craziness with his genius? I mean here you are practicing something taught by a crazy person who thinks he lived past lives, right?

I don't have to reconcile anything. The Buddha was just a man and susceptible to to the fallibility of men. He is not and never claimed to be all powerful all knowing.

Does that fallibility negate the entire volume of his teachings?

And once again I'll explain to you that I have taken some of the Buddha's teachings along with some of the teachings of the classical Stoics along with some of the teachings of Aristotle and Socrates and even a little Thomas Aquinas among many others and incorporated them into my own philosophy.

As I have said there are may roads to any great city.

Sure you do. You are following the teachings of a mad man. That's crazy.

The fact that you believe that right and wrong can be whatever men define it as says you don't understand any of the teachings you have followed because no on on your list of teachers believed that. You are RATIONALIZING your beliefs and behaviors.

 

[Blues Man]

I do not believe it matters if gods exist or not and gods are certainly not necessary in order to live a righteous life.

Thoughts?

The practical benefits of faith and spirituality are so superior to the lack of benefits of materialism that betting on theism is rational and betting on materialism is irrational. It’s not about infinite rewards after death, it is about practical rewards on the journey to death.

Buddhism is hardly a materialist philosophy.

And you still haven't proven your case that a believer in gods is somehow possessing an advantage over a nonbeliever.

I never said Buddhism is a materialist philosophy. But if you do not believe you are more than just matter, your philosophy is a materialist philosophy.

Siddhārtha Gautama did not teach there was no God. He taught to die to self to see reality. Reality is God. And I didn't use the phrase non-believer. I used the phrase materialist which is a more descriptive term. And if you don't believe a person who is spiritual has a natural benefit over materialists then you don't understand Buddhism.

I never said that Buddhism teaches that there is no god.

I said belief in gods is not required to walk the Eight Fold Path.

And spirtuality is a state of mind. The spirit is a product of the mind and does not exist apart from the mind. The mind does not exists apart from the brain, the brain does not exist apart from the body.

So you are saying that Buddhism teaches that spirit is a product of mind? Sounds more like a materialist philosophy than a Buddhist philosophy.

Buddhism teaches nothing regarding eternal spirits, creators or personal deities or spirituality in general.

Enlightenment is the awakening of the intellect and the realizing that nothing is permanent not even your own concept of self.

And to really throw a monkey wrench into your beliefs the very basis of Buddhism is right and wrong. Something I believe you have claimed does not exist and is made up by man. Can't wait to pull on that thread with you and see what unravels.

If nothing is permanent then neither are the concepts of right and wrong.

Sounds like you just completely undermined the Eight Fold Path. right view, right resolve, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi.

No such thing as right and wrong, eh?

We are dealing with the fact that Siddhartha did not speak English and that the translations do not always capture the meanings of the Buddha's words.

For example the word suffering is not the word used by The Buddha.

The correct word , Dukkha, is a Pali word that contains many meanings. It can mean ordinary suffering, but it can also refer to anything that is temporary, incomplete, or conditioned by other things. So even joy and bliss are dukkha because they come and go.

As for the Eight fold Path

The word "right" is the translation. So "Right " Action isn't a commandment as in do this or you are wrong. It means being accurate or skillful, and it carries a connotation of "wise."

Dude, the right view instead of the wrong view, the right resolve instead of the wrong resolve, the right speech instead of the wrong speech, the right conduct instead of the wrong conduct, the right livelihood instead of the wrong livelihood, the right effort instead of the wrong effort, the right mindfulness instead of the wrong mindfulness, and the right samadhi instead of the wrong samadhi.

I am afraid you are just going to have to accept that the Buddha believed in right and wrong just like everyone else.

Just looking at the English translation, viz. "Right", one could say it is the opposite of wrong - like, one should practice "Right Mindfulness" and not "Wrong Mindfulness". This "Right - Wrong" also lends itself to be looked as "Good - Bad". Often, referring back to the Pali or Sanskrit word gives us a better understanding of the english translation. For example, Right Mindfulness in Pali is "samma-sati". The Pali word "samma" has a wide range of meanings: right/rightly, perfect/perfectly, full/fully, complete/completely, through/throughly, proper/properly. Why was "right" chosen in preference to the other possible English words? What about "Proper mindfulness" or "Perfect Mindfulness"?

So any conduct could be the right conduct to achieve enlightenment? What about if I decided to take any woman I wanted, would that be an acceptable conduct to become enlightened?

Again with the rape fantasies.

The Eight fold path is the path of compassion. The Middle Way of the Eight fold Path is not unlike Aristotle's Golden Mean.

You dodged the question.

But apparently you believe in compassion, right? Isn't compassion a man made thing too? What's wrong with being cruel? Is cruel wrong or bad or evil?

I never said all human concepts are worthless. If you think I have then quote the post.

I have said that morality is relative, the concepts of good and evil are relative and those concepts changed over time.

And our society has conflicting ideas on cruelty just as it does on killing.

But you deny this. I don't. In fact I accept it as reality where as the ideal is fantasy.

I never said you said all human concepts are worthless. If you think I have then quote the post.

If you don't believe that right and wrong exist independent of man than you have no basis for saying compassion leads to enlightenment anymore than you have for saying cruelty leads to enlightenment.

I am the one that has been arguing that standards exist for logical reasons. I am trying to show you that you believe compassion leads to enlightenment because of logical reasons. That not all behaviors lead to equal outcomes. That some behaviors lead to better outcomes and some behaviors lead to worse outcomes. Such that right and wrong cannot be defined by what man wants them to be but by what logic dictates they be.

You seem to be hung up on the fact that i said right and wrong are human concepts and you are using a lot of space reminding me that all these different things are human made concepts.

Just like you're hung up on the words right and wrong.