Atheism

Some sects of Buddhism accept the belief of Gods--they just don't see them as worthy of worship.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Some sects of Buddhism accept the belief of Gods--they just don't see them as worthy of worship.

Yes, this. But also that the cannot be worshiped or that the only way to show respect is to mastering the self.

It's worth noting that when Buddhism began it was a time in history when every human accepted some level of supernatural reality, be it gods, ancestral spirits, or elemental forces. It's not surprising that Buddhism's early Sutras/Suttas have copious references to the existence of Gods.

Zen Buddhism especially has always struck me as an injunctive philosophy of reverence. Questions of "God" are a distraction. Just meditate. Period.

A great story...

A student said to Master Ichu, "Please write for me something of great wisdom." Master Ichu picked up his brush and wrote one word: "Attention." The student said, "Is that all?" The master wrote, "Attention. Attention." The student became irritable. "That doesn't seem profound or subtle to me." In response, Master Ichu wrote simply, "Attention. Attention. Attention."

I love the openness and simplicity.

Originally posted by Mindship
Zen Buddhism especially has always struck me as an injunctive philosophy of reverence. Questions of "God" are a distraction. Just meditate. Period.

A great story...

A student said to Master Ichu, "Please write for me something of great wisdom." Master Ichu picked up his brush and wrote one word: "Attention." The student said, "Is that all?" The master wrote, "Attention. Attention." The student became irritable. "That doesn't seem profound or subtle to me." In response, Master Ichu wrote simply, "Attention. Attention. Attention."

I love the openness and simplicity.

😆

He sounds just as much of a smartass as I am.

Simplicity, sure. Openness, not so much. There is a lot of deliberate obfuscation and gnostic smugness in Buddhism.

My impression of Zen Buddhism is that it's a way of avoiding explaining anything while pretending to be wise.

You guys sound like Ichu's student. 😉

Of course Buddhists can be smug and pretentious, just like Jews, Mormons, Catholics, etc, yes, even atheists. It's what many humans become when they adopt a school of thought they think makes them superior to their fellow man.

My point was that Zen (again, as far as I understand it) centers around an instruction ("Don't take my word for it, see for yourself"😉 instead of unquestionable dogma.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
My impression of Zen Buddhism is that it's a way of avoiding explaining anything while pretending to be wise.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Can you watch this for me?

YouTube video

I want to know how much of it you disagree with.

👆

Maybe that will do a better job than I did. Because my discussion with Astner was basically:

A: You position implies proof.
D: No, I don't claim to have proof.
A: Yes you do.

...how do I respond to that?

Originally posted by Digi
👆

Maybe that will do a better job than I did. Because my discussion with Astner was basically:

A: You position implies proof.
D: No, I don't claim to have proof.
A: Yes you do.

...how do I respond to that?

I imagine Astner's like these guys:

YouTube video

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
I imagine Astner's like these guys:

YouTube video

This is why I hate starting arguments just before a weekend study session.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Some sects of Buddhism accept the belief of Gods--they just don't see them as worthy of worship.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Astner is one of those people who's functionally fluent in the English language but incapable of using it correctly. Though I imagine he's much the same in Swedish as well.

The reason for which is that I study mathematics, physics, as well as programming at advance levels. Logic is what I do. That's also why I know the importance of using pre-defined terminology.

That's why you take out your frustration in terms of insults, because I've defined my position logically. There are no flaws in my argument which you can address.

Originally posted by Astner
That's why you take out your frustration in terms of insults, because I've defined my position logically. There are no flaws in my argument which you can address.

the issue is the definitions themselves, though

Originally posted by Oliver North
the issue is the definitions themselves, though

As long as I clarify what I mean by using those labels there should be no issues identifying my position.

Originally posted by Astner
No. Words are just labels representing a definition.

As long as I clarify what I mean by using those labels there should be no issues identifying my position.

Originally posted by Oliver North
the issue is the definitions themselves, though

Originally posted by Oliver North

Please, elaborate. 🙄

I'm implying they are incorrect/inadequate/of little use

Originally posted by Oliver North
I'm implying they are incorrect/inadequate/of little use

Originally posted by Astner
No. Words are just labels representing a definition.

As long as I clarify what I mean by using those labels there should be no issues identifying my position.