Forgive my ignorance, but is Buddha and Buddhism the same Buddha?

[BudAshes]

If they are atheist I recommend star wars quotes.

This one applies specifically:

"It’s a trap"

 

[Perknose]

Just for general background, there are 2 main schools of Buddhism, Theravadin which is the Indian branch (primarily) and tends to be more ascetic and then there's the Mahayana or Chinese branch which has a more expansive interpretation of Buddhism. This is where you get ideas like bodhisattvas and Pure Lands. Mahayana actually means 'Great Vehicle' since it tries to provide a path to enlightenment for everyone, whether it be in this life or the next. They call Theravadin the Hinayana or small or lesser vehicle since they have a much narrower interpretation of Buddhist teaching. Mahayana is by far the dominate branch and the one you find most in the far east. It's the branch Zen belongs to.

It's also interesting (well, to me anyway) that the divide between the "Buddhism in the boonies" (to use a crude term) practiced in the monasteries of Tibet et al and the mystical/expansive Buddhism that, say, CZroe's roomie likely practices is as big or bigger than the divide between authoritarian, old school, jewel encrusted Catholic Cardinals and say, progressive American Catholics or the South and Central American Catholics who tried to practice Liberation Theology and were not only not supported by the Vatican but formally slapped down.

This divide between the "mystical/progressive/loving and accepting" and the "authoritarian/censurious/establishment/control" exists in every organized religion. For Christians, as a shorthand, think Old Testament vs. New Testament.

Example: The present Dali Lama is a beautiful and wise man, imho. But the history of how the Tibetan Buddhist "establishment" dominated and abused the common folk cannot also be denied and is the cover behind which the Chinese paint their brutal, Han Chinese takeover of Tibet as some sort of liberation.

^^^ For those not familiar with any of the backstory here, I probably haven't explained myself all that well. Tant pis!

 

[zinfamous]

I thought Gandhi was Hindu, so totally not Buddhist?

 

[zinfamous]

Religion isn't really real either so.

How is religion not real? It looks pretty fricking real to me.

 

[Thebobo]

How is religion not real? It looks pretty fricking real to me.

It's based on a false premise.

 

[dainthomas]

The current Dalai Lama has said that he is not sure there will be a need for another Dalai Lama. In other words, it is not up to him or China, but depends on whether the world still needs a Dalai Lama. China will obviously try to declare their own person as the next Dalai Lama, but its not as simple as that. I think such actions have resulted in splits in the past, when they could not agree on who the next Dalai Lama should be.

I'm reading his book he wrote with Desmond Tutu. In it he mentions that there are two lamas (forget the name of the other) and they each select the next reincarnation of the other. Since China picked the other lama, he is not legitimate and therefore any choice he makes is not legitimate. So it's my impression he will be the last one (that anyone recognizes as being a true reincarnation).

He only talks about it briefly, so I may have messed it up.

 

[zinfamous]

It's based on a false premise.

that doesn't mean the religion isn't real, though. If belief in false premises negated the existence of the cult surrounding those false premises, then Amway, Herbalife, Young Living/doTerra wouldn't exist, either.

 

[Thebobo]

that doesn't mean the religion isn't real, though. If belief in false premises negated the existence of the cult surrounding those false premises, then Amway, Herbalife, Young Living/doTerra wouldn't exist, either.

I said it isn't REALLY real. I never thought that anyone would of thought I was being literal in the sense that I don't think churches mosques religious people etc aren't real.

 

[interchange]

Ask the Rohinga Muslims and the Tamils.

Baha'i?

 

[Perknose]

that doesn't mean the religion isn't real, though. If belief in false premises negated the existence of the cult surrounding those false premises, then Amway, Herbalife, Young Living/doTerra wouldn't exist, either.

You guys are applying "real" differently. @Thebobo isn't "negating the existence" of any organized religion. He's just saying their doctrines are false, i.e. "not real" because they're based on false premises.

<rant>

Btw, I don't exactly agree. "Religious" views of the world like the existence of an afterlife have not been empirically proved, which is different from saying they are false.

And then you get into all the dumbed-down for the masses, dog and pony show tripe like "God" will help your basketball team win if you only pray or "my 'God' is real but your 'Allah' isn't" or the old Catholic doctrine that an individual could be the most moral person in the world, untainted by sin, but if they weren't baptized they wouldn't go to "heaven." The examples are endless, of course. And said examples are what I think @Thebobo was saying are false premises.

But the existence of realms beyond the ken of our current rigorously empirical understanding of "what is" is moot, that is, open to endless but not conclusive debate.

I well know that OT or ATF in general is not the most welcoming venue to bring this point up, but you, Mr. Empirical Atheist don't know the ultimate reality any more than you, Mr. Religious True Believer.

If modern superstring theories positing 10 or 11 or . . . 26 physical dimensions don't leave you at least questioning your monkey-boy-bound grasp on basic physical reality, of "what is" well . . .

Point is, modern theoretical physics seems to have more points of convergence with Zen Buddhism than it does with Newtonian Physics . . . or Christian doctrine.

I kind of like what The Bard had to say on this subject, hundreds of years ago:

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in our philosophy."

And I like this song, for I stubbornly hold on to my private, personal, if definitely inchoate and unproven sense of the divine.

And I hold in my heart a deep sense of the divine, whatever the hell that may be. But to proselytize others with my mere beliefs? F*ck that. As far as any insistent certainties go, we're all bozos on this bus.

Be they political, religious or AMD vs Nvidia, beware of bozos bearing certainties! Ralph Waldo to the E. was:

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds . . .”

As F. Scott put it, "The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."

The universe is composed of nearly 70% dark matter, and we don't know dick about it. Embrace the fact that whatever you believe to be the fundamental certainties of our existence, you don't know dick.

And thanks for all the fish.

</rant>

 

[Charmonium]

Point is, modern theoretical physics seems to have more points of convergence with Zen Buddhism than it does with Newtonian Physics . . . or Christian doctrine.

I've often mentioned this to people and I don't think it ever registers with anyone so it's good to hear someone else say this.

Quantum mechanics is full of what could be considered logical inconsistencies. Inconsistent from the point of view of conventional reality. There are plenty of examples but to name just a few you have Bell's Theorem which states that in any universe where QM applies you need to give up either local reality or counterfactual definiteness. IOW, you either have to give up the notion of local causality where things can only be affected by objects and forces that they come in contact with, or you have to give up the idea that things really continue to exist when you're not watching them. We pretty much assume both are always true but both can't be for QM to be accurate and all of the evidence says it is.

Then you also have things like quantum tunneling where a particle disappears from one location and reappears at another w/o traversing the space in between. Or the idea of a quantum leap where the same thing happens. And let's not forget about entanglement or superposition.

The quantum world isn't just bizarre. It makes a complete mockery of what we call "reality."