Why pure Buddhism wouldn't survive for that long.

[Riva]

:hi:

Why not?

If you're going to describe the survival of true Buddhism, we need to know what you think it is.

^
That would take too long. Hey Wikipidia has it all i think. I would see and paste a link.

hmmm I could type it in very basic terms. But i would 1st look for a link.

Dude, I don't care what the Internet says, if I am to talk to YOU about it. (How do I know I won't look up something, and you'll say, "Oh that's not TRUE Buddhism?")

I need to know what YOU think true Buddhism is, if I'm going to know how to engage you on the topic.

It's like telling someone to look up Christianity for an explanation -- everyone disagrees on what "real Christianity" actually is.

Fundamentals of Buddhism: The Five Aggregates

 

[Drezoryx]

link talks of vijnana not vinyana.

anyway my point was anatma and karma as concepts cannot coexist in the same theory without contradicting each other. karma requires a record, which can only be in something permanent preferably soul. and anatma says no soul. so buddhism theory is a no go. no maybe if you explain vinayana that might remove this apparent conflict.

 

[Riva]

link talks of vijnana not vinyana.

I know. But Vijnana and all the other 4 aggregates are all you need to know about Buddhism.

 

[Riva]

anyway my point was anatma and karma as concepts cannot coexist in the same theory without contradicting each other. karma requires a record, which can only be in something permanent preferably soul. and anatma says no soul. so buddhism theory is a no go. no maybe if you explain vinayana that might remove this apparent conflict.

I do know, But don't know how to explain.
I tried and I failed miserably.
Ask any Buddhist and see if He/She knows???

That is EXACTLY what this thread was originally about.
Buddhist don't know Shit about Buddhism.

hmmmmmmmm....

Maybe that should have been the thread title. Maybe I should change is if I still can.

 

[Prototype]

I don't understand the last para. you'll have to simplify and not use mathematical terms.

Sorry, I interpreted re-incarnation as something that escalated in phases, or plains, which would explain traveling to different energy machines, to build it up. You mentioned that it occurs at random, like coming back as a frog if one had bad Karma as a human, or basically starting over. Wouldn't that go against the "plan" of meeting up with the Divine?

Yes they do. (according to Buddhism).
And we were not always humans. (that is what i tried to explain in my machine theory).

I got that part, I was asking if other animals would have any conception, or belief of re-incarnation, because they clearly don't philosophize about life, they just do it ... So how is Karma used in a being with no wrong doing, and where does this energy that was built from human form go when one is "transformed" to some other form?

What do you mean by moralize their own existence? Urge/Force it?
If yes....

Yes they can moralize their own existence. Don't animals want to live????
That is any animals primary (main) objective.

To live, To eat, To reproduce isn't it?

And moralizing existence is a desire.
The desire to live.
The desire to do what ever it takes to live.
To survive
to kill
etc etc

Desire?... Or, instinct?

That is the cause of existence in Buddhism........
And enlightenment is the end of existence...
And a Buddha is a person who finds the way out of that existence.

This is very basic Buddhism. This is Buddhism.

... Enlightenment= Permanent death?

 

[Riva]

Sorry, I interpreted re-incarnation as something that escalated in phases, or plains, which would explain traveling to different energy machines, to build it up. You mentioned that it occurs at random, like coming back as a frog if one had bad Karma as a human, or basically starting over. Wouldn't that go against the "plan" of meeting up with the Divine?

What plan? (or maybe I stil don't understand you )


I got that part, I was asking if other animals would have any conception, or belief of re-incarnation, because they clearly don't philosophize about life, they just do it ... So how is Karma used in a being with no wrong doing, and where does this energy that was built from human form go when one is "transformed" to some other form?
Karma is not wrong DOING.
Wrong doings in Buddhism are called sins.
Intentions are called Karma (good or bad)

Desire?... Or, instinct?

... Enlightenment= Permanent death?

Instinct to survive is based on desire to survive isn't it?

Enlightenment = permanent death?
ceasing to exist. yes.

But Enlightenment, i have never experienced.

 

[Drezoryx]

it may be said that the Buddhists start with the idea or conception of an Unknowable Reality, back of and under all forms and activity of the phenomenal universe. Buddha refused to discuss the nature of this Reality, practically holding it to be Unknowable and in the nature of an Absolute Nothing, rather than an Absolute Something in the sense of 'Thingness' as we understand the term; that is to say, it is a No-Thing, rather than a Thing - consequently it is beyond thought, understanding or even imagination - all that can be said is that it IS. Buddha refused to discuss or teach of the manner in which this Unknowable came to manifest upon the Relative Plane, for he held that Man's proper study was of the World of Things and how to escape therefrom. In a vague way however, Buddhism holds that in some way this Unknowable, or a part thereof, becomes entangled in Maya or Illusion, through Avidya or Ignorance, Law, Necessity, or perhaps something in the nature of a Mistake. And arising from this mistaken activity, all the pain and sorrow of the universe arises, for the Buddhist holds that the Universe is a 'World of Woe,' from which the soul is trying to escape. Buddhism holds that the soul Reincarnates often, because of its desires and attractions which, if nursed and encouraged will lead it into lives without number. Consequently, to the Buddhist, Wisdom consists in acquiring a knowledge of the true state of affairs, just mentioned and then upon that knowledge building up a new life in which desire and attraction for the material world shall be eliminated, to the end that the soul having 'killed out desire' for material things - having cut off the dead branch of Illusion - is enabled to escape from Karma and eventually be released from Rebirth, thence passing back into the great ocean of the Unknowable, or Nirvana and ceasing to Be, so far as the phenomenal world is concerned, although of course it will exist in the Unknowable, which is Eternal. Many Western readers imagine the Buddhistic Nirvana to be an utter annihilation of existence and being, but the Hindu mind is far more subtle and sees a vast difference between utter annihilation on the one hand and extinction of personality on the other. That which appears Nothingness to the Western Mind, is seen as No-Thingness to the Oriental conception and is considered more of a resumption of an original Real Existence, rather than an ending thereof.

There is a great difference between the two great schools of Buddhism, the Northern and Southern, respectively, regarding the nature of the soul. The Northern school considers the soul as an entity, differentiated from the Unkowable in some mysterious way not explained by Buddha. On the contrary, the Southern school does not regard the soul as a differentiated or distinct entity, but rather as a centre of phenomenal activity saturated or charged with the results of its deeds and that therefore, the Karma, or the Essence of Deeds, may be considered as the soul itself, rather than as something pertaining to it. The Northern school holds that the soul, accompanied by its Karma, reincarnates along the same lines as those taught by all the other Hindu schools of Reincarnation and Karma. But the Southern school, on the contrary, holds that it is not the soul-entity that reincarnates (for there is no such entity), but that instead it is the Karma, or Essence of Deeds, that reincarnates from life to life, according to its attractions, desires and merits or demerits. In the last mentioned view of the case, the rebirth is compared to the lighting of one lamp from the flame of another, rather than in the transferring of the oil from one lamp to another. But really, these distinctions are quite metaphysical and when refined by analysis become hair-splitting. It is said that the two schools of Buddhism are growing nearer together and their differences reconciled. The orthodox Hindus claim that Buddhism is on the decline in India, being largely supplanted by the various forms of Vedanta. On the other hand, Buddhism has spread to China, Japan and other countries, where it has taken on new forms and has grown into a religion of ritualism, creeds and ceremonialism, with an accompanying loss of the original philosophy and a corresponding increase of detail of teaching, doctrine and disciple and general 'churchiness,' including a belief in several thousand different kinds of hell. But even in the degenerated forms, Buddhism still holds to Reincarnation as a fundamental doctrine.

source:Reincarnation and the Law of Karma by William Walter Atkinson