The Fundamental Flaw in Some Religious Expectations

[wizanda]

There are a few religions that expect some Savoir of the world to fix mankind; when we're down near Hell...

So it is completely illogical to expect everyone to listen properly, and as history shows us with Buddha trying to correct Hinduism or Yeshua trying to correct Judaism, people get more stubborn to changing.

There are multiple religious groups that have a belief that someone will come, show mankind how to interact, and that will magically fix everything, as people will automatically respond well...

This is literally showing some people are not very logical down here, and reject we're down near Hell; where only the CPU (God) can change the dynamics of this reality, to remove the evils within it.

It also shows they want a Savoir rather than to become a Saint themselves; which proves they're a demon down here...

As only those who've recognized here is down near Hell, can truly turn around fully from being 'self' absorbed, to living selflessly.

In my opinion.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Buddha Sakyamnuni did not say anything about Hinduism being wrong, and he did not try to correct their teaching, but what Buddha sakyamuni did, was asking questions about why people from other spiritual paths saw life the way they did. Buddha was already enlighten and did not need to make critique of others. But as of today already that time people did make critique of Buddha Sakyamuni.

As a Buddhist my self, i know that i can not ask/pray to Buddha for him to change my way of living, I must my self work to become a better follower of his path. it is always down to what i do, say and think.

 

[wizanda]

Buddha was already enlighten and did not need to make critique of others.

When we realize here is the Maya; then Buddha's purpose in incarnating down here, was to elevate the understanding of others...

To constructively critique an understanding is not always from ego, so it is wrong to suggest something so unconscious...

An Enlightened teacher is sent down here, to illuminate the darkness from bad comprehension...

did not say anything about Hindusism being wrong

Buddha corrected multiple aspects from Hindu doctrine:

• Such as Atman being seen as self, makes it the soul can have an ego; thus Buddha created a better concept of Anatman.
• That Brahman has no Atman, where it is completely selfless; thus replacing it for a formless Universal Mind (CPU), removes any attachment to form.
• etc.

We have to recognize Buddha was raised in a Hindu cultural understanding; so much of his doctrine is built from it, thus to miss this is to not understand the Dharma.

In my opinion.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Sakyamuni did correct those who made critique of the truth yes. But do remember it was brahmaisme that was the main spiritual path at Sakyamunis time. Hindusism is mostly based on many paths like brahmaism, some from Buddhism, some from other now ended spiritual paths.
Sakamuni was born a prins , and was not influenced by other since he was "locked" in by his fath in the castle. only when Sakyamuni went out he saw sickness and suffering in the world. in the first 6 years of his path he studied different paths from very extreme mosty eating one or two rice grain a day, to not giving thoughts to anything in life (lazyness) But he found that a middle path was the most rightrous path.

 

[Trackdayguy]

In my 30 year faith journey I have would have to say that the most non judgemental people I have met are "Buhai"

 

[wizanda]

the most non judgemental people I have met are "Buhai"

I'd agree that Baha'i are not very judgemental; yet at the same time they don't judge the previous religious texts properly... Being naive down near Hell isn't always a benefit.

In my opinion.

 

[Trackdayguy]

I'd agree that Baha'i are not very judgemental; yet at the same time they don't judge the previous religious texts properly... Being naive down near Hell isn't always a benefit.

In my opinion.

I'm not so sure about that. I think the Bahai have a very good grasp on previous religious texts, because they understand the Bible for one is a spiritual book at needs to be understood spiritually NOT literally. It's literalism that paves the way for judgement.

 

[wizanda]

But he found that a middle path was the most rightrous path.

The path is understood by recognizing the contradictions, and understanding the conclusion in the middle from questioning the many sides.

In other words Buddha knew Hindu Dharmic teaching to an advanced level, and through transcending the process, tried to explain it a new, which is all good; yet everything has a context, and contradictions can educate us the most.

In my opinion.

 

[Looncall]

I'd agree that Baha'i are not very judgemental; yet at the same time they don't judge the previous religious texts properly... Being naive down near Hell isn't always a benefit.

In my opinion.

Hell? What hell? That notion is just a scam of scoundrel clerics, meant to keep pews and collection plates full.

 

[Trackdayguy]

Hell? What hell? That notion is just a scam of scoundrel clerics, meant to keep pews and collection plates full.

Yesssssssssssssssssssssssss. Its the biggest scam ever.

 

[wizanda]

Hell? What hell?

Unfortunately we all die in this plain of conscious existence, and then we go in a lower plain...

Some of us get recycled, some of us don't...

In my opinion.

 

[Trackdayguy]

Unfortunately we all die in this plain of conscious existence, and then we go in a lower plain...

Some of us get recycled, some of us don't...

In my opinion.

When you die, your done. Believe what you will, but it doesn't make it true. If what you believe is working for you, fine. I dont have a problem with it

 

[wizanda]

When you die, your done.

In not just my opinion.

 

[Looncall]

Unfortunately we all die in this plain of conscious existence, and then we go in a lower plain...

Some of us get recycled, some of us don't...

In my opinion.

Evidence?

 

[Trackdayguy]

Evidence?

Whoops, there is none.............

 

[wizanda]

Evidence?

The 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Believe what you will, but it doesn't make it true.

Mine isn't based on belief; I've had a NDE where I've seen it, and have known since birth I was sent down here before the Tribulation.

In my opinion.

 

[Looncall]

The 2nd law of thermodynamics.

Mine isn't based on belief; I've had a NDE where I've seen it, and have known since birth I was sent down here before the Tribulation.

In my opinion.

The second law? Please explain.

By the way, I am a chemist, so don't try idiot apologetics tricks.

 

[wizanda]

The second law? Please explain.

Energy within a closed system has to go somewhere; assuming it just disappears isn't logical.

In my opinion.

 

[Looncall]

Energy within a closed system has to go somewhere; assuming it just disappears isn't logical.

In my opinion.

Why must it go somewhere? I hope you realize that energy is not a substance but rather a means of expressing the states of objects.

 

[wizanda]

Why must it go somewhere?

Energy has to remain in the system; I'm not the one suggesting that it stops.

In my opinion.