Studying a little bit about original Buddhism

[Anhelyna]

Pro - I don't live in the USA - I don't need to be shown how to get to St Peter's

Did you speak with the priest ?

 

[Protoevangel]

My history? ok.

Yes Proscribe / Knowledge3. In just the short time I've known you here, you have gone from Catholic to Lutheran, almost back to Catholic, to Orthodox, almost back to Catholic yet again... Thank God all of these changes have been to Trinitarian, and relatively sober churches, so far.

You have been up front and public with your struggles regarding your mental health issues. That has been very brave of you. You have my admiration and you are always in my prayers.

Yes, my diagnosis is "schizoeffective disorder" but have to wait and see what the Head Psychiatrist says about my mental state. Will pray . .

But the fact is, with this history of jumping from faith to faith, and compounded with this very real issue... I am genuinely concerned for you. I am afraid that you may latch on to this new philosophy/religion and abandon the One True Church.

Maybe my concerns are unfounded. If so, wonderful. But I can only comment on what I know, and let you know that I truly do care, Wesley. God bless you, brother.

 

[Anhelyna]

Putting it bluntly - wot 'e said

 

[ProScribe]

Did you speak with the priest ?

I don't feel speaking with a priest is neccessary unless the priest wants to speak with you.

 

[Anhelyna]

but this is , as I see it, is your problem - you believe that you know better than him - and your priest IS responsible for your spiritual wellbeing.

If you don't talk with him - how does he know that you need help ?

 

[ProScribe]

I have spoken with a canonical priest before - I just don't feel it necessary to speak with them that often.

 

[Anhelyna]

Wish I could say that about myself.

 

[Protoevangel]

I have spoken with a canonical priest before - I just don't feel it necessary to speak with them that often.

Like Anhelyna said, this is your problem. And it is a BIG problem, Wes. You need an Orthodox spiritual director to meet with regularly. Not living in an Orthodox culture just makes that even more important.

 

[Faithful Skeptic]

The main problem with Buddhism, as I see it, is that it views itself as an entirely empty philosophy, which makes it meaningless. Yet it clearly has substance and meaning in it, and the adherents of Buddhism even ascribe meaning to it, so it is self-contradictory. I'm not really a fan of basing everything fundamentally on a contradiction. A contradiction means that something is false in every possible circumstance. Falsity is truth? It makes no sense. Live a Buddhist life, even though living a Buddhist life is completely void of everything.

No, its time to not be fixated on anything. (unhealthy attachments)

How can a Buddhist not be fixated on Buddhism? When your goal is escaping Samsara, how can you achieve it by ignoring it? In order to ignore it, you have to fixate on something else (like NOT fixating about it--which is itself a new but related fixation)...

A Buddhist looks at a half-full glass and says that it is empty despite its appearance. A Christian looks at the same glass and says that it is full--of God's spirit--despite its appearance.

If everything is basically an illusion, as Buddhism seems to espouse, then the very fact that everything is an illusion is a reality--not illusory. If everything being an illusion is true, then it contradicts the reality of that fact.

In order to escape suffering, you have to embrace the reality that is God. Suffering only exists because we are apart from God. When we unite ourselves to God (theosis), there is no suffering.

 

[ProScribe]

Just FYI I did make the trip up there to speak with a priest.

There were no problems indicated except the need for a spiritual director which Protoevangel is talking about.

 

[ArmyMatt]

I would echo what everyone else has said. talk to your priest about your thoughts concerning Buddhism.

 

[ProScribe]

The main problem with Buddhism, as I see it, is that it views itself as an entirely empty philosophy, which makes it meaningless. Yet it clearly has substance and meaning in it, and the adherents of Buddhism even ascribe meaning to it, so it is self-contradictory. I'm not really a fan of basing everything fundamentally on a contradiction. A contradiction means that something is false in every possible circumstance. Falsity is truth? It makes no sense. Live a Buddhist life, even though living a Buddhist life is completely void of everything.

I figured a Buddhist would say "The main problem with Christianity first" . .

How can a Buddhist not be fixated on Buddhism? When your goal is escaping Samsara, how can you achieve it by ignoring it? In order to ignore it, you have to fixate on something else (like NOT fixating about it--which is itself a new but related fixation)...

A Buddhist looks at a half-full glass and says that it is empty despite its appearance. A Christian looks at the same glass and says that it is full--of God's spirit--despite its appearance.

If everything is basically an illusion, as Buddhism seems to espouse, then the very fact that everything is an illusion is a reality--not illusory. If everything being an illusion is true, then it contradicts the reality of that fact.

In order to escape suffering, you have to embrace the reality that is God. Suffering only exists because we are apart from God. When we unite ourselves to God (theosis), there is no suffering.

You know that myth about Jesus in India? Jesus probably sent His disciple St. Thomas there. That is where we get the -Indian Christians-- . .

 

[Colleen1]

I studied Eastern World Religions as a course at a Christian University. Although it is an actual university course at my school we studied it along side chrisianity. I found it insightful but I was surrounded by great teachers etc. and it was a 'safe' place and method to learn about this subject matter. I wasn't struggling as a christian then and now I find it useful when debating issues / christianity with people who are struggling because I can understand their view points etc. I doubt I would have studied this topic on my own though.

 

[Faithful Skeptic]

I figured a Buddhist would say "The main problem with Christianity first" . .

A Buddhist would probably be fine with what I said (mostly) and not consider it a criticism. Their criticism of Christianity would probably consist of something like "it's too full". I'd be fine with that, too.

You know that myth about Jesus in India? Jesus probably sent His disciple St. Thomas there. That is where we get the -Indian Christians-- . .

I don't really get what the Malankara have to do with this.

 

[ProScribe]

A Buddhist would probably be fine with what I said (mostly) and not consider it a criticism. Their criticism of Christianity would probably consist of something like "it's too full". I'd be fine with that, too.

What caught my attention was that Buddhism is older than Christianity and its founder -Gautama Buddha- lived around 557-621 B.C.
(not sure about the exact dating period)

I don't really get what the Malankara have to do with this.

Not much. I was watching some Youtube videos and unfortunately people do put out alot of misinformation and lies or misunderstandings.

 

[Faithful Skeptic]

What caught my attention was that Buddhism is older than Christianity and its founder -Gautama Buddha- lived around 557-621 B.C.
(not sure about the exact dating period)

When I took my Buddhist Philosophy class we were given two sets of possible dates. That was pretty much the one of them and the other was around the same time as Socrates. But yeah, it does pre-date Christianity. Socrates also said some interesting things before the Incarnation. In the apology, he claimed that he received what knowledge he had from the eudaimon (good spirit). He also refers only to god (God?) in the singular.

Not much. I was watching some Youtube videos and unfortunately people do put out alot of misinformation and lies or misunderstandings.

That there are. I saw a Facebook status today saying this: "Genesis = Genes of Isis. The book ORIGINALLY was written by an Egyptian priest named Moses. What we have was NOT written by Moses - a rewrite of a rewrite. Genesis represents the Isis resurrection of the Osirian spirituality that used to exist in Atlantis"

 

[Ortho_Cat]

When I took my Buddhist Philosophy class we were given two sets of possible dates. That was pretty much the one of them and the other was around the same time as Socrates. But yeah, it does pre-date Christianity. Socrates also said some interesting things before the Incarnation. In the apology, he claimed that he received what knowledge he had from the eudaimon (good spirit). He also refers only to god (God?) in the singular.

That there are. I saw a Facebook status today saying this: "Genesis = Genes of Isis. The book ORIGINALLY was written by an Egyptian priest named Moses. What we have was NOT written by Moses - a rewrite of a rewrite. Genesis represents the Isis resurrection of the Osirian spirituality that used to exist in Atlantis"

lol now that's a new one...

 

[steve_bakr]

Like Anhelyna said, this is your problem. And it is a BIG problem, Wes. You need an Orthodox spiritual director to meet with regularly. Not living in an Orthodox culture just makes that even more important.

Proscribe,
I tend to agree that you need to see a spiritual director on a regular basis and shore up your own faith.
Steve

 

[Epistemes]

I know quite a bit about Buddhism because I was Buddhist...once.

Buddhism sounds great on the surface, in books, and in discussion. Plus, it's exotic-ness is also a big attraction for some. We see images of Zen masters and Tibetan lamas in peaceful meditation, surrounded by snowcapped mountains or an otherwise blissful aura, and we think, "I want that!" And sure, what person doesn't want peace? What person doesn't want health of mind and body?

At heart, there are no snowcapped mountains or blissful verandas for the Buddhist practitioner, just everyday, mundane life lived under a new philosophical rubric. The heart of Buddhism is dependent origination - namely that no thing exists on its own but is in constant flux - and from this proceeds the philosophy of sunyata, or emptiness: there is neither existence nor non-existence, just flux, emptiness. The logical, practical end result is that I neither exist nor non-exist, you neither exist nor non-exist, and this moment neither exists nor non-exists.

At heart, Buddhism is an utterly hopeless philosophy - and it takes great comfort in its hopelessness. No hope, no fear, nothing. Everything is a delusion of the mind. Love is a delusion, comfort is a delusion, peace is a delusion, Buddha is a delusion, even the mind is a delusion: it's all mind but there is nothing that can be strictly labelled as "mind." And when you die, you're not actually dying, but the mind thinks it is dying. And, considering that dependent origination is at the epicenter of Buddhism, the cause and effect of "death" is rebirth. Just think: as a Buddhist, you believe that your mother, your father, your siblings, everyone in the world whom you love or has loved you will die and possibly be reborn as a cockroach. And there is likely possibility that you, too, will be reborn as something less-than-human. And it's not like you take rebirth as a cat and continue with the same hopes, dreams, personality, progress that you've accumulated in this life: nope, completely erased, and you assume the "personality" of whatever you're born as. Only those who achieve enlightenment and become Buddhas can transcend rebirth - but Buddhists will tell you that there hasn't been a Buddha in centuries, so that means your chances at escaping rebirth are extremely slim to nil.

So, on the surface, Buddhism seems like a surefire way to shirk personal morality and/or any repercussion for our way of life - but it's not and the repercussions do not include a God who loves us and pursues even into hell. In Buddhism, you're utterly alone, trapped like a monkey in a cell, a victim of mind.

 

[ProScribe]

Proscribe,
I tend to agree that you need to see a spiritual director on a regular basis and shore up your own faith.
Steve

The occasion for a spiritual director and a small class is rare.