redwhine Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 OK, maybe a bit of an exaggeration, but still a significant moment I'd say when Dawkins says "Amen to that". Why? Do you even know what 'Amen' means? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fake Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 We don't have any control over events in life Of course we do. For example you had control over whether you wanted to be Buddhist or not and to make a commitment to follow a religion means you had control and a choice. but it's the very realization of this which reduces the suffering. You have mentioned the word suffering in several of your posts before so I have to ask what suffering are you talking about? Buddhism seems to be implying that we are all seemingly in a state of suffering. In a sense its a bit like the false Christian idea of sin that gets drummed into the "sinners" in that we are all sinners when in reality we are not. I am not suffering and I wonder just how many on this forum are. As far as science vs religion it will always be that way as very few of the God head religious organisations will accept scientific proof over what their God says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted October 3, 2012 Author Share Posted October 3, 2012 Hello Fake, I seem to recall we were mid conversation and you left a couple of questions unanswered, anyway........... Of course we do. For example you had control over whether you wanted to be Buddhist or not and to make a commitment to follow a religion means you had control and a choice[/Quote] Your making the same mistake as Drone by confusing desire, will, influence etc with control of events. I'm not talking about control as in I can clench my fist, I'm talking about in relation to events. For example, I'm not talking about being able to control a car, I'm talking about controlling the event of a journey, I could be the best driver in the world in the safest car but if I have a blow out or if I'm hit by someone else or if get hit by a stray missile I cannot control the event no matter how skillful I am, I can influence the outcome using my skill but not control the event, this is what I mean by control - in relation to events - is that not clear from my previous posts? I have tried to explain it You have mentioned the word suffering in several of your posts before so I have to ask what suffering are you talking about?[/Quote] The word Dukkha is usually rendered into English as suffering, but it's not an exact translation and its exact meaning is a little difficult but I will try to explain it. It means disatisfaction, or grasping at something impossible to hold (a little like trying to grasp flowing water). Because we try to hold things that are transient when they dissipate we suffer, the most blatant example being when we lose a loved one, but it applies to all forms of dissatisfaction. The Buddha said that because we hold things dear (including the idea of a 'self') when those things go we are left suffering, Buddhism is the path to understanding the nature of this suffering so we do not cling to phenomena and thus do not suffer. That's very condensed but it's the gist. Johncocker or onewheeldave may have a slight varient or be able to explain it better than me. Buddhism seems to be implying that we are all seemingly in a state of suffering. In a sense its a bit like the false Christian idea of sin that gets drummed into the "sinners" in that we are all sinners when in reality we are not[/Quote] It's not really like the idea of sin, I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion. I am not suffering and I wonder just how many on this forum are.[/Quote] From the Buddhist understanding of suffering all of us are. If you live your life without frustration, anger, craving of any sort or sadness at any kind of loss then I will accept that from the Buddhist perspective you are not suffering. In which case you will have attained Nibbana and I am very happy for you. As far as science vs religion it will always be that way as very few of the God head religious organisations will accept scientific proof over what their God says. The thread was started to give those religious people who do believe they have sceintific evidence for their faith the opportunity to put it forward. As yet none have taken the opportunity to do so, but the thread has taken on a life of its own which is fine. What it wasn't meant to do (and I take the blame for the stupid title) is to pit science against religion as conflicting world views. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 There was no mistake on my part Richard, it's on yours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 You can believe in god and not be religious so they are together It's just your who says they can't join together Not God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 You can believe in god and not be religious so they are together It's just your who says they can't join together Not God What a surprise, your posts have returned to their former glory (from before you were banned) of making absolutely no sense what so ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 What a surprise, your posts have returned to their former glory (from before you were banned) of making absolutely no sense what so ever. You don't believe what I believe so it will make no sense to you roots Let me know when ya find ya god Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fake Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Hello Fake, I seem to recall we were mid conversation and you left a couple of questions unanswered, anyway........... Hi. Sorry about that but had some inspiration and had to go offline for a few days to write. On returning the thread had expanded so much and I realised I was being daft as I am not an angry atheist. Your making the same mistake as Drone by confusing desire, will, influence etc with control of events. I'm not talking about control as in I can clench my fist, I'm talking about in relation to events. For example, I'm not talking about being able to control a car, I'm talking about controlling the event of a journey, I could be the best driver in the world in the safest car but if I have a blow out or if I'm hit by someone else or if get hit by a stray missile I cannot control the event no matter how skillful I am, I can influence the outcome using my skill but not control the event, this is what I mean by control - in relation to events - is that not clear from my previous posts? I have tried to explain it Thanks for explaining again but is not what you are suggesting just another way of saying fate? Something that a lot of people also believe in. The word Dukkha is usually rendered into English as suffering, but it's not an exact translation and its exact meaning is a little difficult but I will try to explain it. It means disatisfaction, or grasping at something impossible to hold (a little like trying to grasp flowing water). Because we try to hold things that are transient when they dissipate we suffer, the most blatant example being when we lose a loved one, but it applies to all forms of dissatisfaction. The Buddha said that because we hold things dear (including the idea of a 'self') when those things go we are left suffering, Buddhism is the path to understanding the nature of this suffering so we do not cling to phenomena and thus do not suffer. That's very condensed but it's the gist. Johncocker or onewheeldave may have a slight varient or be able to explain it better than me. It's not really like the idea of sin, I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion. What I mean to say is that it is an essential part of your faith as sin is in the Christian faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drone Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 No christian is born a sinner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 You have mentioned the word suffering in several of your posts before so I have to ask what suffering are you talking about? I believe in the Buddhist concept of Dukkha. It's a bad translation to take the word "suffering" literally. You have to understand what they mean. Dukkha is the concept that all life is suffering. If you are enjoying a meal, you must finish eating at some point. That pleasure cannot be eternal, and thus you will return to hunger again. You will suffer again. It doesn't mean you're in agony all day every day. Where I part from the Buddhist view is that I don't believe meditation and the eight-fold path will take me away from this. I see no reason why Nirvana or rebirth should exist anymore than Heaven and Hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.