This is a really good response. I have to admit, I'm very impressed that an actual smart person responed against Amazing Athiest. From what I've seen, the only people to outwardly propose counter arguments or critiques of guys like him on youtube are mostly people who have no idea what their talking about. And I'm glad that's not the case here. Don't get me wrong, Amazing Athiest is funny and all but he can be pretty ignorant and concieted with some stuff. but he's only human.
listen.... whats wrong with you? you people learn things from web pages and any one can write anything. so if you want to learn whats true come to a country like Sri Lanka . and whats more important is the truth its not comparing and fighting over what ever you want to believe. and statue thing??????? seriously? thats just a creation of man. it has nothing to do with the religion.
Unfortunate that a faith with potential has been bombarded throughout it's recent history with pro-government mantra. If the story about Siddhartha was true, he must be rolling in his grave. After all, it was the Buddha's selfishness that inspired him to leave the wife and child. He and only he wanted to help the poor. And did Siddhartha reach enlightenment with someone else's consciousness? I don't think so.
@wingsofliberty437 if you dont know about buddhism just dont give comments about it. know the whole story you will understand what he has done for them. ok? no hard feelings but as a buddhist i never give any comments about other religions. after all the most important thing is his teachings.
@ginrou You are correct! Buddhist statues were directly inspired by the Indo-Greek kingdoms that flourished in the Hellenistic age. I actually made a video about this on my channel.
hahaAccording to Buddhism, actually there are 31 place in the universe there are not only us. There are also Angel 6 places. Evil 4 places, Physical extra-angel 16 places, Nonphysical extra-angel 4 places. New souls could be from there. Just so you know.
I was taught Buddhism in school (born in a Buddhist society) and I can use one word to say why Buddhism doesn't work. Nihilism. I agree with most of the stuffs in Buddhism except things that prohibit me to actually LIVE.
To even attempt to adress topics like Rebirth vs. Reincarnation while explaining how the "karmic pattern" continues to be in flux and how a new consciousness and ego is created in the process is a difficult task, especially when this ego/consciousness in itself is merely a carrier for tendencies and attachments that make up a karmic pattern...but...I have to say...you did a great job !
I think his account 'AmazingAtheist', not American. ^^
I agree with you; Siddartha himself did not accept beliefs and doctrines; Everyone must find their own way. The point of telling us that he reached enlightenment near a river was not telling us to pack our things and head to a river; It was showing us how he attained it, giving us hope and drive to attain it ourselves.
Since desire leads to suffering for one to desire anything including reaching a state of nirvana can and probably will lead to more suffering. After all if you realize that you will not be able to attain what you desire that realization can and probably would lead to suffering over the inability to achieve what you desired.
To try and remove all desire because it leads to suffering is an impossible asperation since it is impossible.
Many misunderstand the teachings of no self for no soul. What we call self is properly described as ego. There is no problem having an ego as long as you do not identify who you are by what you desire or what offends you. The problem is most people have no concept of self beyond what they desire or what makes them comfortable or uncomfortable. Life consist of validating and empowering who you think you are. Death consist of grasping onto this self you have based on fitting into a world of egos.
I am Buddhist and I have heard of soul being mentioned many times. Reincarnation, karma, death, rebirth. A body an impermanent vessel to encase the soul. If someone becomes truly enlightened, one will have no materialistic desire and one's soul will stop being carried over to the next life. That is the concept of reincarnation. Meditation is used to reach Nirvana, which is reached with the higher self.
This is false. Buddha rejected souls, reincarnation, afterlife, etc.
Buddha: "Only through ignorance and delusion do men indulge in the dream that their souls are separate and self-existent entities. ...This body will be dissolved and no amount of sacrifice will save it. ...Since, then, O bhikkhus, there is no self, there cannot be any afterlife of a self. Therefore abandon all thought of self."
This is false. Buddha rejected souls, reincarnation, afterlife, etc" how someone can make a statement like this is baffling to me. i would have to point you too, i don't know, any buddhist sutra, the abhidharma, or the vinaya. as to you quotation, source please, it seems invented or at best horribly translated.
@BTNH24 actually nevermind about the quote, i re-read it. it's talkig about the self, or soul, atman. while buddha taught there was no soul or self, he still taught that beings are reborn, due to clinging, dukha.
Great video! I'm fairly new to Buddhism, but I am very well skilled in metaphysics/transmetaphysics/philosophy and understand the central Buddhist philosophy. It surprises me that even it's adherence completely misunderstand it and spreading misinformed ideas about his philosophy.
Atheism isn't just a lack of belief in God(s), it is an acceptance that we do not know the the answers to religious questions. Buddhism claims to have 'the' religious answers (this is why it is a religion); thus Buddhism is NOT atheistic.
@D0g63rt You're wrong. Atheists don't believe there is no God, we believe the world works as though there aren't any Gods and thus we live our lives as though Gods don't exist. Atheists say "we think it's highly unlikely Gods exist", whereas agnostics shrug and say "we donno". Go read up on atheism and see for yourself.
Atheism is very simply defined as non-theism. You're describing a kind of theism. And you describe atheism as though it's some sort of club. It's really not supposed to be a club either, but a non-club.
@D0g63rt I suppose it is a club in the sense that it's a definable set of people. But it's not a club in the sense that we all meet to participate in silly ceremonies and to pretend we know the meaning of existence etc. Oh, and we don't have a heirarchy, we don't idolise objects, and we try not to interfere with scientific advancement either. And we don't use a silly naive belief as a lame excuse to not respect people born with deformaties.
@C0C0nutFace What you described as Atheism is in fact agnostic. Atheism is claims to have religious answers in that there is no deities, no afterlife, no spirit. I know you wrote your comment awhile ago almost a year but wanted to clarify.
SudanCarib you are misinformed you are talking about Hindu not Buddism get it right before you try to say it is somthing that it is not. Buddism is about cultivating, and understanding SELF not a god or what have you. plz actualy try to learn about it before you speak on it again
you can foul mouth christianity without going to the bible what did the bible have to do with the Spainish inquisition for example. Why did christs advice lead to endless conquests did he maybe give bad advice.unwittingly. He did niot see the power for bad of saying he was the one, i suppose that is the excuse for thinking he is the only one..The story of the good samaritan would indicate that all religions could be valid,Tthe catholics are the ones who don't read the bible. rose macaskie
I find it unfortuante that the Amazing Atheist is so blined by his anti-religious stance, that he can't take the time to bother researching what it is he is addressing.
Buddhism does believe in a soul type thing but they refer to it as the "mind".
The mind is everything: thoughts, emotions, intuition, and the list goes on.
and to answer where the mind comes from. It is "beginningless" as quoted from a monk. now im not sure what that really means lol but they are basically saying there not 100% sure where it comes from as for everyother religion points to God Buddhists dont. I dont believe that it comes from God either.
TAA wasn't making a case against souls. He said that the concept of "rebirth" or "reincarnation" was a concept that is unsupported by any scientific evidence and is not something that an 'atheist' or 'skeptic' could accept. You did not address this in this response, instead you talked about Buddhists' lack of belief in souls.
And TAA said that Karma was another belief unsupported by evidence, that attaches guilt and responsibility to the handicapped. You simply deflected.
I'm not defending TheAmazingAtheist, but there is a huge difference between the things you read in Zen, or the Dharmapada, and the things taught in modern Mahayana. There is still corruption in monastic traditions, (as in all religions) These things need to be mocked. You are right about skepticism, but some people are led to FORGET that. One last thing, If No-self doctrine is correct then what accumulates merit through works? Thanks, good vid!
buddism accepts science. tht is why the majority of asians are smart because they accept anything and have a peaceful state of mind!! VALID VICtORIAN!!!!!!
You need to do some reading to before you make ignorant statements. Every religion accepts science. But they don't "believe" in putting science above God. So if science interferes with the word of God then they will be against it. Does that make sense to you?
I am a Jodo Shin Buddhist and agree with your response to Brad except on the issues of God and the Soul. I would welcome having a discussion of these two issue with you. If you are interested please visit my website at buddhismiuniverse that details my beliefs on these two issues, George K.
I've subscribed to several atheist channels, being an atheist myself. I gave TJ's some consideration but after watching a few of his and how juvenile and distorted he is about a lot of things, I decided not to subscribe to him. He's spot on with a lot of things, but...his behavior is like nails across the blackboard and makes him look ridiculous.
I'll give you another example of non-buddhists' misconception of Buddhism. A coworker, who knows I'm a buddhist, came to me and said "I thought buddhism was a non-violent philosophy?" I responded, "Do you have reason to believe otherwise?"......she responded, "Because I read a site where Buddhists say 'if you meet Buddha on the road, kill him'".
Bless her heart. It took all of 15 minutes to explain koans.
You should organize your thoughts before you begin to record. You started off so slowly trying to think of what to say that I lost interest, wrote this message and went on to something else before you could utter a coherent sentence.
buddhagem: I think what you say needs to be said against TheAmazingAtheist, but your words fall on an empty space somewhere between his ears. And I don't mean meditation empty :D
He's not 'that' interested in building his knowledge to actually have a basis for argument. That is not why he made the posts. What he has actually said IS "I don't understand Buddhism, so I will trash it along with all other religions.
Peace and happiness to you. I admire your desire to level the playing field again.
Buddha and me very close friend, we often time go together singging and karaoke. 1 day Buddha ask me...well..I fell something wrong with him...What is it...I ask...He said his penis become horny...What the fucking hell..!!
like as before, buddha will get mastubate before we get out from cave....I said to him...did you got mastubate this morning...? he said NO...why..because there are no more lubricant in our cave..
Again i say i love buddhism!, but why trying 2 explain something 2 some1 who doesnt believe?, he is rigth bcuz he doesnt believe, no matter what u say or i say he still doesnt believe. Every1 do what they think is best 4 them like u, like me or him.
Buddha was a great philosopher, in the same way as Plato or Aristotle. But calling yourself "Buddhist" is as silly as calling yourself a Platoist or a Aristotlist. You simply apply the truths in their words in your progress towards enlightenment.
Understand him, not follow him.
But in the same way, I don't like the label of "atheist" because it shouldn't exist as a way to define yourself either. I.e. you don't say I'm a non-farmer to define yourself if you are not a farmer.
So what does that have to do with him being a great thinker or not. Most men in that time were both of those. His personal views, which were common at the time, don't discredit the great ideas that he formulated about this world.
Gandhi was also a bigot and racist. Newton was arrogant and an extreme elitist. Nietzsche was in love with his mother. Edison was a shameless about his ego and undercut most of his competitors.
Don't just dwell on the negative, because otherwise you will never get far.
I just realized. Your point on souls not existing in buddhism disproves TJ, but it also disproves your entire belief. If souls dont exist, you still need some kind of energy that defines you in order to reincarnate as the same person to be reborn. You then talk about energies that don't expire to be reborn, which is the definition of a soul. What you did is say souls dont exist and call him ignorant, then went on to talk about how souls do exist, by throwing around words with a different meaing.
You missed the point. Whether souls exist or not is a moot point in Buddhism. The Buddha taught the not-self strategy which basically gets you past that pointless question to the important work of understanding suffering, what causes suffering, and how to eliminate suffering. Buddhism teaches nothing about souls existing.
@buddhagem well busism believe that every thing is interconnected ; there is no beggining or end so to say one learns a religion easier becuse they spoke it in a differnt life; is the same as, you amazing athiest; saying you have blond hair becuase of your genectic make up.
@buddhagem "You missed the point. Whether souls exist or not is a moot point in Buddhism" it's not a moot point at all. the buddha was quite precise in his explanation of how a soul absolutely cannot exist. annata.
@buddhagem "Buddhism teaches nothing about souls existing." there are stacks of scripture and exegetical commentary from masters throughout the ages that totally contradicts this statement.
Buddhists don't believe in reincarnation, we believe in rebirth, and yes, it is very different. Think of two candles, one of them lit. When take the lit candle to light the unlit one, does the flame itself transfer over? No, the flame merely creates the conditions for combustion to occur on the other wick. This is the same way in which rebirth takes place, nothing is reborn, this life merely creates conditions for the next birth to arise. There is no self, no soul, no permanently fixed 'me'.
Not to be combative, but I heard a way of describing Buddhist reincarnation that I like better. It isn't like a cup pouring its water into a new cup, with the same water moving from cup to cup...it's like a cloud becoming rain: the cloud isn't rain, but the cloud BECOMES rain, and the cloud and the rain share the same SUBSTANCE...and in reincarnation, this "substance" isn't a soul, but a progression of consciousness.
Rebirth is not about the same person being born. When you die, all that you refer to as yourself dies along with your body. So it is certainly not the same person. However, the energy, atoms, proteins, etc are recycled in nature and are put together in a new way. This is rebirth. And this is based on karma... if your actions lead you to california, you will be buried in california, which would cause the trees there to grow... and so the cycle continues.
@ZoltanKH it's like nirvana zoltan, it's undefinable in concepts or words. Buddhism is a path to be walked, not followed. Nirvana cannot be defined other than by the result which is the end of suffering. The state itself is transcendant of the idea of Karma understood in Buddhism. Understanding dependent origination is the first step along path, but this is just the first glimpse at the light at the end of the tunnel. Liberation from rebirth is just a concept that illicits faith and devotion.
@ThereIsARain If reincarnation is not literal then why should you care if a) your next life is going to be good or bad and b) whether you ever achieve Nirvana. If I don't literally reincarnate, that is if "me" doesn't exist after I die then I'm not going to ever suffer from bad deeds I did in a past life because that "I' doesn't exist. If the thing that gets reincarnated isn't me then neither is the thing that achieves nirvana, so why care if it happens or not?
@ZoltanKH a soul by definition is a non physical object. Basically an illogical term as Buddhists as this man has said view the inner self as a sort of energy rather than a non existent yet existent substance. They have a completely logical view on the concept of "souls"
@utube2344 Who defined the soul as an object? The soul, if it exists, is that which could reincarnate. Whatever it is that reincarnates can only be described as a "soul". If it's part of you and it survives your death that's your soul. That you try to pretend it's some sort of energy and therefore not a soul, but who said the soul wasn't energy?
Regarding reincarnation. The best and most logical explanation I have ever come across that I find almost impossible to argue against is on Youtube. Type in: Part 1 of 9 The Body and Mind. and listen to it for yourself - it's well worth the effort. It's from an audiobook and the character telling it has an annoying voice but it's barable - otherwise just switch the volume off and read.
Secondly, there are over 100,000 variations of Buddhism in the world - some have large followings and some small. Like Christianity and other major religions with similar amounts of variations, in most cases Buddhism has been polluted by mans ideals and misconceptions - the result of that cause is the effect we have today with all our differences and prejudices etc. More obvious is the reflection of who we are as a whole - to answer that we anly need to look at our polluted and ailing planet.
Regarding the statues of Buddha - Buddha gave instructions to his followers not to build images of him and they obeyed. It was the Greeks who built the statues as a gift when they entered India many years after to do trade eccetera. According the the historicalk accounts, Buddha was actually a slim man with extra long arms.
danytibi seems to think that im against buddhism "no matter what" which is simply not true. i'm only against the heaven/hell type of supernatural elements in buddhism, such as reincarnation and lotus births. take those sore spots out and buddhism becomes more like a harmless philosophy, with some useful qualities as Sam Harris points out. :)
Good to know you are not against buddhism "no matter what".
I think the proper aproach to the afterlife for a buddhist can be found in this zen koan: A samurai once asked a zen master "What happens after we die?" The master said, "I don't know". The samurai then said "How do you not know!? Are you not a zen master?" to which the master replied "Yes... but not a dead one."
the best part of buddhism is a non-religious one. once religion and hocus pocus comes into it, it becomes a silly childish myth, like all religions. all religions have one thing in common - they provides a specific "after-life" scnenario to the belivers via heaven/hell/reincarnation etc.
i know there's lots of useful things in buddhism as a philosophy, though i may not agree with all of them, but i shall continue to criticize buddhism the religion harshly, as it claims to know after life.
"good to know you are not against buddhism no matter what"
of COURSE not!! that would be nonsensical and irrational! and atheists are anything but! :)
btw, i started to get upset at buddhism the religion because a friend of mine recnetly converted and started lecturing at me about reincarnation. it was SOOOO annoying especially since i know the history of abuse regardign that particular belief point. :(
of course they don't, because buddhism at its core is not a religion. it's not about afterlife. only religions claim to save people from bad "afterlife" whatever that is.
so you agree that the teaching of reincarnation and "religifying" buddhism is a bad thing? :)
I agree that superstition is always bad. And I do want to purify buddhism from superstition, so yes, I think you and I are in almost perfect agreement. :)
i think the non-religious buddhists should be on the forefront of criticizing the religious buddhism.
very often i get criticized by the non-religious buddhists for criticizing the religious aspect of buddhism, which i never understood :-\ obviously they agree with me that it's bad if they reject it.
"I am strongly against proselitizing, buddhism works for me, and I don't think anyone "has to be" a buddhist,"
that's cool. i have my own philosophy that works for me, have no intention whatever of proselytizing either, as that usually leads to distortion and the emergence of lowest common denominator-type of simplification. besides, we are all different, our circumstances are all different, and in the end we all have to find our own way :)
i tried to talk some sense into him, but he was in love with the idea of reincarnation, and the neatness in which it explained the unjust world. now religion is popular because it always provides "neat explanations" for things which really do not have any explanation like "death"
unfortunatly most practicing buddhists ignore all the interesting bits about buddhism as philosophy, and concentrate on these not only silly but harmful "explanations" of the mystery of life in buddhism the religion.
just because they got away from doing wrong once doesn't mean they always get away.. theres always a balance that's probably why we have bad ppl and good ppl.. thats the same thing as saying "kobe makes every basket" thats just not logical cuz he doesn't make every basket.. but i see where ur comin from but i disagree..
yes, dalai lama, perhaps the most famous buddhist in the world completely believes in reincarnation/past lives. it's strange to have these people come out and claim otherwise, like they are experts.
true. but strangely enough those people never seem to criticize dalai lama more openly for being an untrue buddhist. why is that? why do they let dalai ruin the image of buddhism in the world for thinking people? is it because the gullible hollywood set like richard gere worship him? or..?
also in christianity, a huge portion of christians publicly split up from the pope and the stupid dogma of catholicism, to create a slightly less stupid protestantism.
also: though Pope doesn't speak for all Christianity, he does believe in heaven/hell which is also believed by most christians, both protestants and catholics alike. So if we are discussing the equivalent of reincarnation/karma in Christianity (ie. heaven hell) yes, we can say that pope DOES speak for the majority of the Christians.
not only does Dalai lama believe in the reincarnation and karma, but the vast majority of the buddhists in Asia, where, after all, buddhism originated, believe in karma/reincarnation. so in general discussions of Buddhism as a religion, it seems a bit disingenuous to point out that there are a small minority of those who do not believe in reincarnation, and therefore the criticisms of reincarnation/karma in Buddhism as a religion is invalid.
No buddhist sect ever "split" from tibetan buddhism so far as I know, precisely because the Dalai Lama never was the representative of all buddhism, like the Pope once was for Christianity. And if your only problem with buddhism is belief in reincarnation then that's not a very strong criticism, because even without it, the teachings of Gautama survive.
the majority of buddhism believes in reincarnation and that's why i criticize it.
if there's a small sect that does not believe it, all the more power to them.
i'm criticizing the MAJORITY of the buddhism believers, jsut as the MAJORITY of the christians believe in heaven and hell
"And if your only problem with buddhism is belief in reincarnation then that's not a very strong criticism, because even without it, the teachings of Gautama survive."
What I mean is if all you are criticizing is belief in reincarnation, then you are not actually arguing against buddhism, but against a tradition. You may criticize things like "veneration of saints" in Christianity. But that is not a very effective criticism, because even though it is believed by most catholics and orthodox it is not common to ALL versions of christianity. Reincarnation may be believed by the majority of buddhists, but it is still just a tradition, not the core of the rleigion.
well if you do not know the history of how buddhism was actually practiced, this belief in reincarnation (which was adopted wholesale by most buddhism from hinduism) was not a simple innocent "tradition" -- it was propped up to support the hateful "caste" system in India, where the higher caste justified their horrible treatment of lower caste saying the lower caste had sinned in their previous lives and they didn't. the Tibetan monks also used reincarnation to enslave 95% of the population.
"it was propped up to support the hateful "caste" system in India"
I didn't say "innocent", I simply said tradition. It did not arise from the teachings of the Buddha himself, it was present long before him in Hindu society.
So criticizing reincarnation/karmic retribution in buddhism is not only valid, but it's pointing out the most heinous part of buddhism as a religion as it's been actually practiced.
even today, in the east, if a woman is living with an abusive husband, she is often told "you did something in your past life to deserve him, to work out your bad karma you have to continue living with him and suffer so in your next life you would be free of this bad karma"
so buddhists themselves should actively try to eradicate such harmful way of thinking. the belief in reincarnation/karmic retribution has caused too much grief and damage already, if it's "merely" a tradition, it's a truly pernicious devilish one.
Indeed, they HAVE joined me, in their rejection of it. Glad to see that some buddhists see the ridiculousness of the idea behind karmic retribution and reincarnation. it's only proving my point on how harmful such supernatural mumbojumbo is to the mind. :)
Buddhism, at its core is a technology. If you were going to argue about Buddhism; I would expect it to be: "Meditation does not work." This is the core of Buddhism. The Buddha did not do much speculation although he did speak on Rebirth- other schools of Buddhism revealed what they found out through meditation- Rebirth is one of those things. Your friend should know to be skeptical of Rebirth unless/till meditation reveals such gnosis to them.
buddhism as it's practiced is riddled with superstition and other nonsense like reincarnation. this has to be exposed and ridiculed like we do christianity, islam and other religions.
julia sweeney tried buddhism after she renounced catholicism and traveled to asia but when confronted with people who blamed sick children's illness on their "past life sins"she got disgusted and decided upon atheism.
If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. -- Albert Einstein
I don't think your comparison of Buddhist and Christian approach to science is fair since one is strong on dogma and the other avoids it. A human problem is to take anything and twist it toward personal ends-- in the cases that you describe that is exactly what's going on and actually something that doesn't survive the mindfulness that Buddhism demands.
all religious people have this in common -- instead of criticizing those who practice their religion wrongly (according to them) and thereby abusing people, they choose to speak out the loudest against the critics of these abusers. -- and in so doing they become nothing more than enablers of the abusers, and become complicit in the abuse.
Will you take responsibility for an atheist that goes out and kills a bunch of theists?
All I'm suggesting is for you not to be such a reductionist.
I think that atheists are very necesary and I basically agree with them. Most understand that Buddhism is not in the same boat as say Islam or Christianity.
Meditation is a technique that allows one to turn one's subjective state into an object of attention. And this continues ad infinitum until enlightenment where one is freed from this cycle to abide in what can best be described as Emptiness. This is important because it is this precise process that spurs all growth in consciousness and makes oppression less likely. Buddhism is the most practical and honest religion on Earth. It welcomes skeptics and offers Technology.
We can have a discussion about reincarnation itself and the merits and weaknesses of the concept. You seem to misunderstand it-- but to do so would be a distraction. The first conversation that we would have to have is one on meditation because that is the core of Buddhism. Meditation is even more important than the 4 Noble Truths IMO, b/c I don't know if anyone can accept those truths without meditation. I will post a follow up on why this distinction is so important:
"please don't try to proselytize. it's unbecoming of a buddhist."
LoL- I didn't realize that Buddhists weren't expected to have opinions or to correct ignorant statements.
Will you take responsibility for an atheist that goes out and kills a buncha theists?
Like I said in another post- I'm more on your side than this conversation seems to reveal but I just want to guard against the crude material populism that could be nearly as bad as fundamentalist religion that zealots subscribe to.
If you read Gotama's original teachings, he does state that a belief in a soul is irrelevant in the obtaining of enlightenment. Buddhism is a teaching of the middle way of life, to eliminate craving and to eliminate the craving to stop craving.
If there's no soul, what is it that can be reborn as an animal, like a fish? What is it that goes from this body into the body of a fish (at the time of conception)? Because that's what the Dalai Lama believes. For practical purposes, it is a soul - and it's nonsense in my opinion.
You're getting into Hinduism there, we are reborn on a chemical/scientific level. Matter cannot be created or destroyed, pretty basic. He actually states this point in his video.
Then the Dalai Lama is a Hindu and mainstream Buddhists are Hindus. But really, I don't sure that even Hindus believe that nonsense - at least, they're not supposed to.
Interestingly, the biggest Buddhist "discussion" forum on the net is e-sangha, which is a *fundamentalist* forum, where discussion and dissent is not allowed. Literally. If you offer reasons against what they dictate to you, such as the dogma of literal rebirth (eg, as an animal), you are instantly banned.
Why can people just focus on their religion? I am a Buddhist and I really don't care what other people think. For instance, I like Suzuki bikes and I don't expect others to like it too.
Buddhism is not purely atheist like Jainism. Buddha believed in the Hindu deitiies, he just doubted their power or relevence. Also, he did not disallow people to propitiate and worship him, though it was not required- similar to the historical Jesus. Ontological agnosticism is closer to the truth. Also, the Mahaparinirvana Sutra says all beings have a "higher Self" similar to Hinduism, this is the Buddha-datu, the Buddha nature.
You are speaking about buddhism in its purer forms. Many buddhists actually worship buddha as a god and believe in salvation and souls and all that theistic stuff. Buddhas word has been totally distorted
let me prove karma to u.. in the scientific world they call it "cause and affect" in buddhism we call it karma.. so my quote here is "u get what u deserve" think hard about that quote what it really means.. what u do now will result in something later no matter what.. and science proves it..
So ur saying karma is not relative? and that karma doesn't exist? "cause and effect".. so basically u just said ur decision now will not have an impact later on in life.. that's not even logical.. ur choice now does have an impact later on whether its good or bad.. its still relative and thats karma.. if u do good things usually good things happen, if u do bad things usually bad things happen.. doesn't mean its always going to be that way, sometimes bad things happen to good ppl.. relativitity..
religious people never believe the evidence of experience -- that existence/world does not run on "moral system" they cannot imagine anything beyond their narrow moral confines.
according to their way of thinking holocaust victims all "deserved" what they got, since they all probably "sinned horribly" in their past lives. everything is "just" in this karma system, which i find totally sinister...
If u plant a seed, it must be put in good soil, the season be proper, & rain enough for the seed to bear it's fruit. The same is of Karma(Action). U think U have escaped, but it's just waiting for the right conditions, no matter how long-sometimes over lifetimes. If u think that u are not reborn, just subtract the idea of "u/me/I" & replace it with "matter/energy complexes" & ask urself what happens 2 ur own matter/energy complex after u die (Thermodynamics). Problem is belief in idea of "me".
Mmm! You hit on my biggest contention w/ TAA's video right off the bat -- He rails against Buddhism, but obviously doesn't understand it! Karma, 4 noble truths, everything is totally twisted through his total krazy-straw of a brain and is all distorted!
The main thing we need to do is take responsibility for our own good and bad circumstances and try to make good causes towards all life. :o) I personally chant Nam myoho renge kyo each day to try and gain the wisdom and good fortune to help others.
But my main point here is: If Buddhism believed we are nothings and had no soul, as some suggest,then how could we return. It's crazy. Truth is, we only use about 10 percent of our mind potential. We are like children trying to explain the knowledge of aan adult academic. All these people who make these statements etc are children too.
He taught that we are here to realise our negative karma and change it by making good causes - change our poisons into medicine. He regreted that most of us are instead being motivated by our neg karma to make even more bad cuses, destroying this world (place of opportunity) in the process. He was right about suffering cuz nearly everything on this planet has to kill or destroy to merely exist.
Buddha taught that this is a 'saha' world (world of suffering). And those of us born into it are here because we have made cause in previous existences. he explained there a millions of worlds like this in the Saha system. there are also other higher state worlds where people have made good cause to reach. He said the same differences can be seen in this world - such as better or worse places, circumstances, parents etc to be born.
As a Buddhist myself, i like you. However, The Buddha did not say whether there was a God or not or a soul or not, so you can't say that Buddhism is purely an athiest religion, and you can't say whether there is a soul or not. Think your lovely tho mate.
This is a really good response. I have to admit, I'm very impressed that an actual smart person responed against Amazing Athiest. From what I've seen, the only people to outwardly propose counter arguments or critiques of guys like him on youtube are mostly people who have no idea what their talking about. And I'm glad that's not the case here. Don't get me wrong, Amazing Athiest is funny and all but he can be pretty ignorant and concieted with some stuff. but he's only human.
simpsonman956 1 week ago
listen.... whats wrong with you? you people learn things from web pages and any one can write anything. so if you want to learn whats true come to a country like Sri Lanka . and whats more important is the truth its not comparing and fighting over what ever you want to believe. and statue thing??????? seriously? thats just a creation of man. it has nothing to do with the religion.
mudikripto 1 month ago
Unfortunate that a faith with potential has been bombarded throughout it's recent history with pro-government mantra. If the story about Siddhartha was true, he must be rolling in his grave. After all, it was the Buddha's selfishness that inspired him to leave the wife and child. He and only he wanted to help the poor. And did Siddhartha reach enlightenment with someone else's consciousness? I don't think so.
wingsofliberty437 7 months ago
@wingsofliberty437 if you dont know about buddhism just dont give comments about it. know the whole story you will understand what he has done for them. ok? no hard feelings but as a buddhist i never give any comments about other religions. after all the most important thing is his teachings.
mudikripto 1 month ago
You're boring.
MikieBBB2007 1 year ago
As a Buddhist and an atheist...I thank you.
aristottlesdeathwish 1 year ago
buddhist art as we know it today was actually heavily influenced by the greek culture. look up geco-buddhist art.
ginrou 1 year ago
@ginrou You are correct! Buddhist statues were directly inspired by the Indo-Greek kingdoms that flourished in the Hellenistic age. I actually made a video about this on my channel.
zeppelin8 1 year ago
Do not believe what you yourself have imagined,
persuading yourself that a God inspires you.
Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests.
After examination, believe what you yourself have tested
and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto.
Buddhism28401 1 year ago
hahaAccording to Buddhism, actually there are 31 place in the universe there are not only us. There are also Angel 6 places. Evil 4 places, Physical extra-angel 16 places, Nonphysical extra-angel 4 places. New souls could be from there. Just so you know.
southdai 1 year ago
@southdai quantum physics is good stuff
1Pantikian 1 year ago
gdxcfvhn
southdai 1 year ago
thank you
teechef 1 year ago
I was taught Buddhism in school (born in a Buddhist society) and I can use one word to say why Buddhism doesn't work. Nihilism. I agree with most of the stuffs in Buddhism except things that prohibit me to actually LIVE.
Achilles9924 1 year ago
To even attempt to adress topics like Rebirth vs. Reincarnation while explaining how the "karmic pattern" continues to be in flux and how a new consciousness and ego is created in the process is a difficult task, especially when this ego/consciousness in itself is merely a carrier for tendencies and attachments that make up a karmic pattern...but...I have to say...you did a great job !
PeacefulApe 1 year ago
I think his account 'AmazingAtheist', not American. ^^
I agree with you; Siddartha himself did not accept beliefs and doctrines; Everyone must find their own way. The point of telling us that he reached enlightenment near a river was not telling us to pack our things and head to a river; It was showing us how he attained it, giving us hope and drive to attain it ourselves.
By the way, you seem very depressed. :(
I hope you can find happiness! ^^
ApcFlippylover 1 year ago
Thank you for this Vid. I really enjoy your insight into Buddhism.
ACEN111 1 year ago
Since desire leads to suffering for one to desire anything including reaching a state of nirvana can and probably will lead to more suffering. After all if you realize that you will not be able to attain what you desire that realization can and probably would lead to suffering over the inability to achieve what you desired.
To try and remove all desire because it leads to suffering is an impossible asperation since it is impossible.
PastorIblis 1 year ago
you dont know shitt!! so shut the fuck up!!
acaciastreetfilms 1 year ago
Many misunderstand the teachings of no self for no soul. What we call self is properly described as ego. There is no problem having an ego as long as you do not identify who you are by what you desire or what offends you. The problem is most people have no concept of self beyond what they desire or what makes them comfortable or uncomfortable. Life consist of validating and empowering who you think you are. Death consist of grasping onto this self you have based on fitting into a world of egos.
brgordon38 1 year ago
Precisely, He didn't even bring up prevalent fact! Thank you for your response
omniouroboros 1 year ago
I am Buddhist and I have heard of soul being mentioned many times. Reincarnation, karma, death, rebirth. A body an impermanent vessel to encase the soul. If someone becomes truly enlightened, one will have no materialistic desire and one's soul will stop being carried over to the next life. That is the concept of reincarnation. Meditation is used to reach Nirvana, which is reached with the higher self.
LadyZeppelin1960 1 year ago
@LadyZeppelin1960
This is false. Buddha rejected souls, reincarnation, afterlife, etc.
Buddha: "Only through ignorance and delusion do men indulge in the dream that their souls are separate and self-existent entities. ...This body will be dissolved and no amount of sacrifice will save it. ...Since, then, O bhikkhus, there is no self, there cannot be any afterlife of a self. Therefore abandon all thought of self."
BTNH24 1 year ago
@BTNH24 "@LadyZeppelin1960
This is false. Buddha rejected souls, reincarnation, afterlife, etc" how someone can make a statement like this is baffling to me. i would have to point you too, i don't know, any buddhist sutra, the abhidharma, or the vinaya. as to you quotation, source please, it seems invented or at best horribly translated.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
@BTNH24 actually nevermind about the quote, i re-read it. it's talkig about the self, or soul, atman. while buddha taught there was no soul or self, he still taught that beings are reborn, due to clinging, dukha.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
Great video! I'm fairly new to Buddhism, but I am very well skilled in metaphysics/transmetaphysics/philosophy and understand the central Buddhist philosophy. It surprises me that even it's adherence completely misunderstand it and spreading misinformed ideas about his philosophy.
Great job at setting it straight!
BTNH24 1 year ago
Atheism isn't just a lack of belief in God(s), it is an acceptance that we do not know the the answers to religious questions. Buddhism claims to have 'the' religious answers (this is why it is a religion); thus Buddhism is NOT atheistic.
C0C0nutFace 1 year ago
That's really not what atheism means. Agnosticism maybe, but definitely not atheism.
D0g63rt 1 year ago
@D0g63rt You're wrong. Atheists don't believe there is no God, we believe the world works as though there aren't any Gods and thus we live our lives as though Gods don't exist. Atheists say "we think it's highly unlikely Gods exist", whereas agnostics shrug and say "we donno". Go read up on atheism and see for yourself.
C0C0nutFace 1 year ago
Atheism is very simply defined as non-theism. You're describing a kind of theism. And you describe atheism as though it's some sort of club. It's really not supposed to be a club either, but a non-club.
D0g63rt 1 year ago
@D0g63rt I suppose it is a club in the sense that it's a definable set of people. But it's not a club in the sense that we all meet to participate in silly ceremonies and to pretend we know the meaning of existence etc. Oh, and we don't have a heirarchy, we don't idolise objects, and we try not to interfere with scientific advancement either. And we don't use a silly naive belief as a lame excuse to not respect people born with deformaties.
C0C0nutFace 1 year ago
@C0C0nutFace What you described as Atheism is in fact agnostic. Atheism is claims to have religious answers in that there is no deities, no afterlife, no spirit. I know you wrote your comment awhile ago almost a year but wanted to clarify.
tsunamijin 11 months ago
You pwn3d that nub.
raccoonlord 1 year ago
SudanCarib you are misinformed you are talking about Hindu not Buddism get it right before you try to say it is somthing that it is not. Buddism is about cultivating, and understanding SELF not a god or what have you. plz actualy try to learn about it before you speak on it again
USMCsniperboy 1 year ago
@TranshumanCyborg Everything is circular, right?
dharmaseed 1 year ago
thank u for posting this :) hopefully people will take this in over wat that fat a** said
rezartsy 1 year ago
buddhism is happiness in slavery
noblewulfff 1 year ago
Realz. Acceptance shit.
Sufi-mind tricks are where it's at.
raccoonlord 1 year ago
buddhism does believe in demons, have deities and etc!! they are polythiest, not athiest!
SudanCarib 1 year ago
@SudanCarib yep
BillKiernan 1 year ago
karmic fruits ? always question and if you dont agree dont accept
somme36 1 year ago
you can foul mouth christianity without going to the bible what did the bible have to do with the Spainish inquisition for example. Why did christs advice lead to endless conquests did he maybe give bad advice.unwittingly. He did niot see the power for bad of saying he was the one, i suppose that is the excuse for thinking he is the only one..The story of the good samaritan would indicate that all religions could be valid,Tthe catholics are the ones who don't read the bible. rose macaskie
rosemacaskie 1 year ago
I find it unfortuante that the Amazing Atheist is so blined by his anti-religious stance, that he can't take the time to bother researching what it is he is addressing.
LordMalice6d9 2 years ago
I applaud you for making this video so civil...I just watched "the case against buddhism" and I was fairly infuriated.
I'm not even a buddhist and his arrogant ignorance made the video almost unwatchable.
Tartersauce101 2 years ago
Buddhism does believe in a soul type thing but they refer to it as the "mind".
The mind is everything: thoughts, emotions, intuition, and the list goes on.
and to answer where the mind comes from. It is "beginningless" as quoted from a monk. now im not sure what that really means lol but they are basically saying there not 100% sure where it comes from as for everyother religion points to God Buddhists dont. I dont believe that it comes from God either.
eaglesfan1717 2 years ago
(1:25)
eaglesfan1717 2 years ago
TAA wasn't making a case against souls. He said that the concept of "rebirth" or "reincarnation" was a concept that is unsupported by any scientific evidence and is not something that an 'atheist' or 'skeptic' could accept. You did not address this in this response, instead you talked about Buddhists' lack of belief in souls.
And TAA said that Karma was another belief unsupported by evidence, that attaches guilt and responsibility to the handicapped. You simply deflected.
MrDustandechoes 2 years ago
I'm not defending TheAmazingAtheist, but there is a huge difference between the things you read in Zen, or the Dharmapada, and the things taught in modern Mahayana. There is still corruption in monastic traditions, (as in all religions) These things need to be mocked. You are right about skepticism, but some people are led to FORGET that. One last thing, If No-self doctrine is correct then what accumulates merit through works? Thanks, good vid!
Aestros909 2 years ago
@Aestros909 you do realize zen is mahayana right?
BillKiernan 1 year ago
thank you for finally standing up to that douche! (sorry i dont have the same self control)
zigglefritz101101 2 years ago
In the beginning of this video. You could tell he wanted to just flat out say "You dumbass!" lol
RastafariPoet 2 years ago 12
@RastafariPoet lmao.
killintymm 1 year ago
Bald head+Little Glasses+Whiteness=Bourgeois Buddhist Asshole
sonofdrella09 2 years ago
buddism accepts science. tht is why the majority of asians are smart because they accept anything and have a peaceful state of mind!! VALID VICtORIAN!!!!!!
Danerd9 2 years ago
You need to do some reading to before you make ignorant statements. Every religion accepts science. But they don't "believe" in putting science above God. So if science interferes with the word of God then they will be against it. Does that make sense to you?
HeyWakeUpPeople 2 years ago
Comment removed
HeyWakeUpPeople 2 years ago
I am a Jodo Shin Buddhist and agree with your response to Brad except on the issues of God and the Soul. I would welcome having a discussion of these two issue with you. If you are interested please visit my website at buddhismiuniverse that details my beliefs on these two issues, George K.
darwinisgreat 2 years ago
i can clerly see that you now lot about budhist
khangsar88 2 years ago
thank you for telling this guy about budhist becous that guy dont no nothing about budhist
khangsar88 2 years ago
I've subscribed to several atheist channels, being an atheist myself. I gave TJ's some consideration but after watching a few of his and how juvenile and distorted he is about a lot of things, I decided not to subscribe to him. He's spot on with a lot of things, but...his behavior is like nails across the blackboard and makes him look ridiculous.
Mechelle68 2 years ago
yo but buddhism accepts science. religion plus science = win!!!!!!!!!!!!
tht is why asians are smart. they gots peace and acceptance wit anythin!!!
Danerd9 2 years ago 2
You have a nicely shaped head.
wolfyweir 2 years ago
nice, but its too bad that the amazing athiest won't ever try to understand us. He has his beliefs, and we ours.
jellisrellish 2 years ago
Relax man, fuckem...
HBSchool 2 years ago
I'll give you another example of non-buddhists' misconception of Buddhism. A coworker, who knows I'm a buddhist, came to me and said "I thought buddhism was a non-violent philosophy?" I responded, "Do you have reason to believe otherwise?"......she responded, "Because I read a site where Buddhists say 'if you meet Buddha on the road, kill him'".
Bless her heart. It took all of 15 minutes to explain koans.
Mechelle68 2 years ago 2
You should organize your thoughts before you begin to record. You started off so slowly trying to think of what to say that I lost interest, wrote this message and went on to something else before you could utter a coherent sentence.
imjustpassinthru 2 years ago
What's it like having the attention span of a chimp on speed?
dynamltedoug 2 years ago
@dynamltedoug hahahahahah
dekar003 2 years ago
buddhagem: I think what you say needs to be said against TheAmazingAtheist, but your words fall on an empty space somewhere between his ears. And I don't mean meditation empty :D
He's not 'that' interested in building his knowledge to actually have a basis for argument. That is not why he made the posts. What he has actually said IS "I don't understand Buddhism, so I will trash it along with all other religions.
Peace and happiness to you. I admire your desire to level the playing field again.
jdavisabc123 2 years ago 3
Read my story,
Long...long time ago.very2 long time..
Buddha and me very close friend, we often time go together singging and karaoke. 1 day Buddha ask me...well..I fell something wrong with him...What is it...I ask...He said his penis become horny...What the fucking hell..!!
like as before, buddha will get mastubate before we get out from cave....I said to him...did you got mastubate this morning...? he said NO...why..because there are no more lubricant in our cave..
continue..next book..
MrTonyshit80 2 years ago
Again i say i love buddhism!, but why trying 2 explain something 2 some1 who doesnt believe?, he is rigth bcuz he doesnt believe, no matter what u say or i say he still doesnt believe. Every1 do what they think is best 4 them like u, like me or him.
Soydlejos 2 years ago
Buddha was a great philosopher, in the same way as Plato or Aristotle. But calling yourself "Buddhist" is as silly as calling yourself a Platoist or a Aristotlist. You simply apply the truths in their words in your progress towards enlightenment.
Understand him, not follow him.
But in the same way, I don't like the label of "atheist" because it shouldn't exist as a way to define yourself either. I.e. you don't say I'm a non-farmer to define yourself if you are not a farmer.
XenMonkey13 2 years ago
If you think Aristotle was a great philosopher then you're fucking crazy.
sneakybeard 2 years ago
You are obviously missing the point.
Also do you even know anything about Aristotle?
What makes you say he wasn't great?
XenMonkey13 2 years ago 2
He was an ignorant bigot and a misogynist.
sneakybeard 2 years ago
So what does that have to do with him being a great thinker or not. Most men in that time were both of those. His personal views, which were common at the time, don't discredit the great ideas that he formulated about this world.
Gandhi was also a bigot and racist. Newton was arrogant and an extreme elitist. Nietzsche was in love with his mother. Edison was a shameless about his ego and undercut most of his competitors.
Don't just dwell on the negative, because otherwise you will never get far.
XenMonkey13 2 years ago 8
@XenMonkey13 how was Gandhi a bigot and racist?
1Pantikian 1 year ago
@XenMonkey13 You're just making ad hominem attacks that have nothing to do with anything. Who are you, Glenn Beck?
destructicon500 1 year ago
This is the best reply in defense of a religion that I have yet to see.
I appreciate your knowledge of the metaphor involved within Buddhism and what Buddha said.
I am an Atheist by definition and have great respect for true Buddhist thought and interpretation.
But I am not Buddhist because of my acceptance of not knowing something, and the idea of "Kill the Buddha."
When I understood that I knew I couldn't be a Buddhist.
cont.
XenMonkey13 2 years ago
You're confusing a soul with a spirit.
soul = body + mind
spirit = "life force"
To say that the soul doesn't exist is to say that we don't exist, because the soul is our carnal beings.
ebedelohim 2 years ago
I just realized. Your point on souls not existing in buddhism disproves TJ, but it also disproves your entire belief. If souls dont exist, you still need some kind of energy that defines you in order to reincarnate as the same person to be reborn. You then talk about energies that don't expire to be reborn, which is the definition of a soul. What you did is say souls dont exist and call him ignorant, then went on to talk about how souls do exist, by throwing around words with a different meaing.
ZoltanKH 2 years ago
You missed the point. Whether souls exist or not is a moot point in Buddhism. The Buddha taught the not-self strategy which basically gets you past that pointless question to the important work of understanding suffering, what causes suffering, and how to eliminate suffering. Buddhism teaches nothing about souls existing.
buddhagem 2 years ago 5
@buddhagem well busism believe that every thing is interconnected ; there is no beggining or end so to say one learns a religion easier becuse they spoke it in a differnt life; is the same as, you amazing athiest; saying you have blond hair becuase of your genectic make up.
rjohson 1 year ago
@buddhagem "You missed the point. Whether souls exist or not is a moot point in Buddhism" it's not a moot point at all. the buddha was quite precise in his explanation of how a soul absolutely cannot exist. annata.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@buddhagem "Buddhism teaches nothing about souls existing." there are stacks of scripture and exegetical commentary from masters throughout the ages that totally contradicts this statement.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
Buddhists don't believe in reincarnation, we believe in rebirth, and yes, it is very different. Think of two candles, one of them lit. When take the lit candle to light the unlit one, does the flame itself transfer over? No, the flame merely creates the conditions for combustion to occur on the other wick. This is the same way in which rebirth takes place, nothing is reborn, this life merely creates conditions for the next birth to arise. There is no self, no soul, no permanently fixed 'me'.
vanquisher91 2 years ago 2
Not to be combative, but I heard a way of describing Buddhist reincarnation that I like better. It isn't like a cup pouring its water into a new cup, with the same water moving from cup to cup...it's like a cloud becoming rain: the cloud isn't rain, but the cloud BECOMES rain, and the cloud and the rain share the same SUBSTANCE...and in reincarnation, this "substance" isn't a soul, but a progression of consciousness.
Ashiman12 2 years ago 2
Rebirth is not about the same person being born. When you die, all that you refer to as yourself dies along with your body. So it is certainly not the same person. However, the energy, atoms, proteins, etc are recycled in nature and are put together in a new way. This is rebirth. And this is based on karma... if your actions lead you to california, you will be buried in california, which would cause the trees there to grow... and so the cycle continues.
drkroman9 2 years ago
oh my god...that was so retarded, but the karma example was just phenomenally stupid
ZoltanKH 2 years ago
@ZoltanKH
Not all Buddhists even believe or accept reincarnation as part of the faith. ^^
ApcFlippylover 1 year ago
@ZoltanKH That's a common misunderstand of real Buddhism.
BigBangDerek 1 year ago
@ZoltanKH it's like nirvana zoltan, it's undefinable in concepts or words. Buddhism is a path to be walked, not followed. Nirvana cannot be defined other than by the result which is the end of suffering. The state itself is transcendant of the idea of Karma understood in Buddhism. Understanding dependent origination is the first step along path, but this is just the first glimpse at the light at the end of the tunnel. Liberation from rebirth is just a concept that illicits faith and devotion.
zen699 1 year ago
@ZoltanKH When the Buddha spoke of, "reincarnation" he didn't mean it literally.
Hur dur.
Buddhism is simple and it is this: Stop taking yourself so seriously. You're digging yourself deeper into a hole. Let go. You (I?) are nothing.
ThereIsARain 1 year ago
@ThereIsARain If reincarnation is not literal then why should you care if a) your next life is going to be good or bad and b) whether you ever achieve Nirvana. If I don't literally reincarnate, that is if "me" doesn't exist after I die then I'm not going to ever suffer from bad deeds I did in a past life because that "I' doesn't exist. If the thing that gets reincarnated isn't me then neither is the thing that achieves nirvana, so why care if it happens or not?
newperve 11 months ago
@ZoltanKH a soul by definition is a non physical object. Basically an illogical term as Buddhists as this man has said view the inner self as a sort of energy rather than a non existent yet existent substance. They have a completely logical view on the concept of "souls"
utube2344 1 year ago
@utube2344 Who defined the soul as an object? The soul, if it exists, is that which could reincarnate. Whatever it is that reincarnates can only be described as a "soul". If it's part of you and it survives your death that's your soul. That you try to pretend it's some sort of energy and therefore not a soul, but who said the soul wasn't energy?
newperve 11 months ago
Comment removed
nogozonePSI 2 years ago
Regarding reincarnation. The best and most logical explanation I have ever come across that I find almost impossible to argue against is on Youtube. Type in: Part 1 of 9 The Body and Mind. and listen to it for yourself - it's well worth the effort. It's from an audiobook and the character telling it has an annoying voice but it's barable - otherwise just switch the volume off and read.
matureasian 2 years ago
Secondly, there are over 100,000 variations of Buddhism in the world - some have large followings and some small. Like Christianity and other major religions with similar amounts of variations, in most cases Buddhism has been polluted by mans ideals and misconceptions - the result of that cause is the effect we have today with all our differences and prejudices etc. More obvious is the reflection of who we are as a whole - to answer that we anly need to look at our polluted and ailing planet.
matureasian 2 years ago
Hmmm...
Regarding the statues of Buddha - Buddha gave instructions to his followers not to build images of him and they obeyed. It was the Greeks who built the statues as a gift when they entered India many years after to do trade eccetera. According the the historicalk accounts, Buddha was actually a slim man with extra long arms.
matureasian 2 years ago
danytibi seems to think that im against buddhism "no matter what" which is simply not true. i'm only against the heaven/hell type of supernatural elements in buddhism, such as reincarnation and lotus births. take those sore spots out and buddhism becomes more like a harmless philosophy, with some useful qualities as Sam Harris points out. :)
earthypig 3 years ago
Good to know you are not against buddhism "no matter what".
I think the proper aproach to the afterlife for a buddhist can be found in this zen koan: A samurai once asked a zen master "What happens after we die?" The master said, "I don't know". The samurai then said "How do you not know!? Are you not a zen master?" to which the master replied "Yes... but not a dead one."
danytibi 3 years ago
the best part of buddhism is a non-religious one. once religion and hocus pocus comes into it, it becomes a silly childish myth, like all religions. all religions have one thing in common - they provides a specific "after-life" scnenario to the belivers via heaven/hell/reincarnation etc.
i know there's lots of useful things in buddhism as a philosophy, though i may not agree with all of them, but i shall continue to criticize buddhism the religion harshly, as it claims to know after life.
earthypig 3 years ago
"good to know you are not against buddhism no matter what"
of COURSE not!! that would be nonsensical and irrational! and atheists are anything but! :)
btw, i started to get upset at buddhism the religion because a friend of mine recnetly converted and started lecturing at me about reincarnation. it was SOOOO annoying especially since i know the history of abuse regardign that particular belief point. :(
earthypig 3 years ago
I'm sorry for your bad experience. ):
I am strongly against proselitizing, buddhism works for me, and I don't think anyone "has to be" a buddhist, or believe like me to be "saved".
danytibi 3 years ago
of course they don't, because buddhism at its core is not a religion. it's not about afterlife. only religions claim to save people from bad "afterlife" whatever that is.
so you agree that the teaching of reincarnation and "religifying" buddhism is a bad thing? :)
earthypig 3 years ago
I agree that superstition is always bad. And I do want to purify buddhism from superstition, so yes, I think you and I are in almost perfect agreement. :)
danytibi 3 years ago
i think the non-religious buddhists should be on the forefront of criticizing the religious buddhism.
very often i get criticized by the non-religious buddhists for criticizing the religious aspect of buddhism, which i never understood :-\ obviously they agree with me that it's bad if they reject it.
earthypig 3 years ago
"I am strongly against proselitizing, buddhism works for me, and I don't think anyone "has to be" a buddhist,"
that's cool. i have my own philosophy that works for me, have no intention whatever of proselytizing either, as that usually leads to distortion and the emergence of lowest common denominator-type of simplification. besides, we are all different, our circumstances are all different, and in the end we all have to find our own way :)
earthypig 3 years ago
i tried to talk some sense into him, but he was in love with the idea of reincarnation, and the neatness in which it explained the unjust world. now religion is popular because it always provides "neat explanations" for things which really do not have any explanation like "death"
unfortunatly most practicing buddhists ignore all the interesting bits about buddhism as philosophy, and concentrate on these not only silly but harmful "explanations" of the mystery of life in buddhism the religion.
earthypig 3 years ago
Nicely done - well put
paulieb4444 3 years ago
wow. you actually made a good response.:]
i am an atheist and usually everyones response is so ridiculous. yours is calm and insightful. good job.
kreeper887 3 years ago
just because they got away from doing wrong once doesn't mean they always get away.. theres always a balance that's probably why we have bad ppl and good ppl.. thats the same thing as saying "kobe makes every basket" thats just not logical cuz he doesn't make every basket.. but i see where ur comin from but i disagree..
markiexp85 3 years ago
I think the Amazing Atheist made good points.
Some buddhists believe in past lives. You say thats not what it teaches, but who are you?
You say "no soul" but you said Buddha didnt answer the question of the soul, so you act like the teaching says point blank "no soul"
so WHO ARE YOU?
You generalize a lot aswell.
fallenwillrise 3 years ago 2
yes, dalai lama, perhaps the most famous buddhist in the world completely believes in reincarnation/past lives. it's strange to have these people come out and claim otherwise, like they are experts.
earthypig 3 years ago
exactly , like these atheists just want to sweep all this evidence and history right under the rug. Western "buddhists", i swear.
fallenwillrise 3 years ago
Just like the Pope doesn't speak for all Christianity, the Dalai Lama does not speak for all of buddhism.
danytibi 3 years ago
true. but strangely enough those people never seem to criticize dalai lama more openly for being an untrue buddhist. why is that? why do they let dalai ruin the image of buddhism in the world for thinking people? is it because the gullible hollywood set like richard gere worship him? or..?
earthypig 3 years ago
also in christianity, a huge portion of christians publicly split up from the pope and the stupid dogma of catholicism, to create a slightly less stupid protestantism.
so the analogy doesn't quite work.
earthypig 3 years ago
also: though Pope doesn't speak for all Christianity, he does believe in heaven/hell which is also believed by most christians, both protestants and catholics alike. So if we are discussing the equivalent of reincarnation/karma in Christianity (ie. heaven hell) yes, we can say that pope DOES speak for the majority of the Christians.
earthypig 3 years ago
Likewise, with reincarnation and DAlai lama.
not only does Dalai lama believe in the reincarnation and karma, but the vast majority of the buddhists in Asia, where, after all, buddhism originated, believe in karma/reincarnation. so in general discussions of Buddhism as a religion, it seems a bit disingenuous to point out that there are a small minority of those who do not believe in reincarnation, and therefore the criticisms of reincarnation/karma in Buddhism as a religion is invalid.
earthypig 3 years ago
No buddhist sect ever "split" from tibetan buddhism so far as I know, precisely because the Dalai Lama never was the representative of all buddhism, like the Pope once was for Christianity. And if your only problem with buddhism is belief in reincarnation then that's not a very strong criticism, because even without it, the teachings of Gautama survive.
danytibi 3 years ago
what you just said didn't make logical sense.
the majority of buddhism believes in reincarnation and that's why i criticize it.
if there's a small sect that does not believe it, all the more power to them.
i'm criticizing the MAJORITY of the buddhism believers, jsut as the MAJORITY of the christians believe in heaven and hell
"And if your only problem with buddhism is belief in reincarnation then that's not a very strong criticism, because even without it, the teachings of Gautama survive."
earthypig 3 years ago
What I mean is if all you are criticizing is belief in reincarnation, then you are not actually arguing against buddhism, but against a tradition. You may criticize things like "veneration of saints" in Christianity. But that is not a very effective criticism, because even though it is believed by most catholics and orthodox it is not common to ALL versions of christianity. Reincarnation may be believed by the majority of buddhists, but it is still just a tradition, not the core of the rleigion.
danytibi 3 years ago
well if you do not know the history of how buddhism was actually practiced, this belief in reincarnation (which was adopted wholesale by most buddhism from hinduism) was not a simple innocent "tradition" -- it was propped up to support the hateful "caste" system in India, where the higher caste justified their horrible treatment of lower caste saying the lower caste had sinned in their previous lives and they didn't. the Tibetan monks also used reincarnation to enslave 95% of the population.
earthypig 3 years ago
"it was propped up to support the hateful "caste" system in India"
I didn't say "innocent", I simply said tradition. It did not arise from the teachings of the Buddha himself, it was present long before him in Hindu society.
danytibi 3 years ago
So criticizing reincarnation/karmic retribution in buddhism is not only valid, but it's pointing out the most heinous part of buddhism as a religion as it's been actually practiced.
even today, in the east, if a woman is living with an abusive husband, she is often told "you did something in your past life to deserve him, to work out your bad karma you have to continue living with him and suffer so in your next life you would be free of this bad karma"
earthypig 3 years ago
so buddhists themselves should actively try to eradicate such harmful way of thinking. the belief in reincarnation/karmic retribution has caused too much grief and damage already, if it's "merely" a tradition, it's a truly pernicious devilish one.
earthypig 3 years ago
if there's a tiny sect of "christianity" that does NOT believe in heaven and hell, then all the more power to them.
it doesn't negate my valid criticism of the majority of the christians who do.
earthypig 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Similarly if there's a small sect of Buddhism that does not believe in reincarnation, all the more power to them.
it does NOT negate my valid criticism of the majority of the buddhists who DO.
earthypig 3 years ago
indeed, those buddhists who do not believe in reincarnation should join me in criticizing the buddhists who do believe in reincarnation.
earthypig 3 years ago
Indeed, they HAVE joined me, in their rejection of it. Glad to see that some buddhists see the ridiculousness of the idea behind karmic retribution and reincarnation. it's only proving my point on how harmful such supernatural mumbojumbo is to the mind. :)
earthypig 3 years ago
Buddhism, at its core is a technology. If you were going to argue about Buddhism; I would expect it to be: "Meditation does not work." This is the core of Buddhism. The Buddha did not do much speculation although he did speak on Rebirth- other schools of Buddhism revealed what they found out through meditation- Rebirth is one of those things. Your friend should know to be skeptical of Rebirth unless/till meditation reveals such gnosis to them.
IntegralPolitico 2 years ago
buddhism as it's practiced is riddled with superstition and other nonsense like reincarnation. this has to be exposed and ridiculed like we do christianity, islam and other religions.
julia sweeney tried buddhism after she renounced catholicism and traveled to asia but when confronted with people who blamed sick children's illness on their "past life sins"she got disgusted and decided upon atheism.
earthypig 2 years ago
If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. -- Albert Einstein
I don't think your comparison of Buddhist and Christian approach to science is fair since one is strong on dogma and the other avoids it. A human problem is to take anything and twist it toward personal ends-- in the cases that you describe that is exactly what's going on and actually something that doesn't survive the mindfulness that Buddhism demands.
IntegralPolitico 2 years ago
interesting.
all religious people have this in common -- instead of criticizing those who practice their religion wrongly (according to them) and thereby abusing people, they choose to speak out the loudest against the critics of these abusers. -- and in so doing they become nothing more than enablers of the abusers, and become complicit in the abuse.
earthypig 2 years ago
Will you take responsibility for an atheist that goes out and kills a bunch of theists?
All I'm suggesting is for you not to be such a reductionist.
I think that atheists are very necesary and I basically agree with them. Most understand that Buddhism is not in the same boat as say Islam or Christianity.
IntegralPolitico 2 years ago
Meditation is a technique that allows one to turn one's subjective state into an object of attention. And this continues ad infinitum until enlightenment where one is freed from this cycle to abide in what can best be described as Emptiness. This is important because it is this precise process that spurs all growth in consciousness and makes oppression less likely. Buddhism is the most practical and honest religion on Earth. It welcomes skeptics and offers Technology.
IntegralPolitico 2 years ago
"your friend should know to be skeptical of rebirth unless/till meditation reveals such gnosis to them"
meditation "reveals" reincarnation the same way jesus crazy people claim that the holy spirit was "revealed"to them.
there is zero proof of reincarnation.
same as there is zero proof of heaven/hell
beyond wishful thinking and hallucination.
peace.
earthypig 2 years ago
We can have a discussion about reincarnation itself and the merits and weaknesses of the concept. You seem to misunderstand it-- but to do so would be a distraction. The first conversation that we would have to have is one on meditation because that is the core of Buddhism. Meditation is even more important than the 4 Noble Truths IMO, b/c I don't know if anyone can accept those truths without meditation. I will post a follow up on why this distinction is so important:
IntegralPolitico 2 years ago
please don't bother -- i actually know more about buddhism than you think i do. and i'm not impressed.
please don't try to proselytize. it's unbecoming of a buddhist.
peace.
earthypig 2 years ago
"please don't try to proselytize. it's unbecoming of a buddhist."
LoL- I didn't realize that Buddhists weren't expected to have opinions or to correct ignorant statements.
Will you take responsibility for an atheist that goes out and kills a buncha theists?
Like I said in another post- I'm more on your side than this conversation seems to reveal but I just want to guard against the crude material populism that could be nearly as bad as fundamentalist religion that zealots subscribe to.
IntegralPolitico 2 years ago
If you read Gotama's original teachings, he does state that a belief in a soul is irrelevant in the obtaining of enlightenment. Buddhism is a teaching of the middle way of life, to eliminate craving and to eliminate the craving to stop craving.
RoxasLawliet 3 years ago
If there's no soul, what is it that can be reborn as an animal, like a fish? What is it that goes from this body into the body of a fish (at the time of conception)? Because that's what the Dalai Lama believes. For practical purposes, it is a soul - and it's nonsense in my opinion.
ksol000 3 years ago
You're getting into Hinduism there, we are reborn on a chemical/scientific level. Matter cannot be created or destroyed, pretty basic. He actually states this point in his video.
RoxasLawliet 3 years ago
Then the Dalai Lama is a Hindu and mainstream Buddhists are Hindus. But really, I don't sure that even Hindus believe that nonsense - at least, they're not supposed to.
ksol000 3 years ago
Interestingly, the biggest Buddhist "discussion" forum on the net is e-sangha, which is a *fundamentalist* forum, where discussion and dissent is not allowed. Literally. If you offer reasons against what they dictate to you, such as the dogma of literal rebirth (eg, as an animal), you are instantly banned.
ksol000 3 years ago
Why can people just focus on their religion? I am a Buddhist and I really don't care what other people think. For instance, I like Suzuki bikes and I don't expect others to like it too.
YungTL80 3 years ago
Buddhism is not purely atheist like Jainism. Buddha believed in the Hindu deitiies, he just doubted their power or relevence. Also, he did not disallow people to propitiate and worship him, though it was not required- similar to the historical Jesus. Ontological agnosticism is closer to the truth. Also, the Mahaparinirvana Sutra says all beings have a "higher Self" similar to Hinduism, this is the Buddha-datu, the Buddha nature.
Magnulus76 3 years ago
Yes. This true self is the nondual witness that arises in the One Taste of the Great Perfection...
MaBu888 3 years ago
You are speaking about buddhism in its purer forms. Many buddhists actually worship buddha as a god and believe in salvation and souls and all that theistic stuff. Buddhas word has been totally distorted
bartyfarslar 3 years ago 6
Buddhism is idiotic pseudo-scientific nonsense created by idiots to herd idiots.
No Blind Faith? What about the stupid concept of Karma you believe in?
PROVE IT.
kenryder 3 years ago
what do you mean concept of karma, we don't say that if you don't believe in Buddhism or Buddha you shall get bad karma
kprdnw 3 years ago 5
read the kalama sutra
kprdnw 3 years ago
let me prove karma to u.. in the scientific world they call it "cause and affect" in buddhism we call it karma.. so my quote here is "u get what u deserve" think hard about that quote what it really means.. what u do now will result in something later no matter what.. and science proves it..
markiexp85 3 years ago 2
You don't always get what you deserve, likewise, you don't always deserve what you get therefore Karma is not true.
kenryder 3 years ago 2
So ur saying karma is not relative? and that karma doesn't exist? "cause and effect".. so basically u just said ur decision now will not have an impact later on in life.. that's not even logical.. ur choice now does have an impact later on whether its good or bad.. its still relative and thats karma.. if u do good things usually good things happen, if u do bad things usually bad things happen.. doesn't mean its always going to be that way, sometimes bad things happen to good ppl.. relativitity..
markiexp85 3 years ago
karma and the laws of motion have nothing to do with eachother. There have been many people who did bad things and got away with it.
hardhittn63 3 years ago
religious people never believe the evidence of experience -- that existence/world does not run on "moral system" they cannot imagine anything beyond their narrow moral confines.
according to their way of thinking holocaust victims all "deserved" what they got, since they all probably "sinned horribly" in their past lives. everything is "just" in this karma system, which i find totally sinister...
earthypig 3 years ago 2
If u plant a seed, it must be put in good soil, the season be proper, & rain enough for the seed to bear it's fruit. The same is of Karma(Action). U think U have escaped, but it's just waiting for the right conditions, no matter how long-sometimes over lifetimes. If u think that u are not reborn, just subtract the idea of "u/me/I" & replace it with "matter/energy complexes" & ask urself what happens 2 ur own matter/energy complex after u die (Thermodynamics). Problem is belief in idea of "me".
matreyia 3 years ago
nope
hardhittn63 3 years ago
i am with you baldy.....
Sookchai 3 years ago
Mmm! You hit on my biggest contention w/ TAA's video right off the bat -- He rails against Buddhism, but obviously doesn't understand it! Karma, 4 noble truths, everything is totally twisted through his total krazy-straw of a brain and is all distorted!
CatCommunication 3 years ago
The main thing we need to do is take responsibility for our own good and bad circumstances and try to make good causes towards all life. :o) I personally chant Nam myoho renge kyo each day to try and gain the wisdom and good fortune to help others.
PeaceInSongs 3 years ago
He was right about destroying the planet too.
But my main point here is: If Buddhism believed we are nothings and had no soul, as some suggest,then how could we return. It's crazy. Truth is, we only use about 10 percent of our mind potential. We are like children trying to explain the knowledge of aan adult academic. All these people who make these statements etc are children too.
PeaceInSongs 3 years ago
we arent nothing, the cosmic energy or similar to it, cease to exist in our body.. which is energy, not soul.
hotboymm777 2 years ago
He taught that we are here to realise our negative karma and change it by making good causes - change our poisons into medicine. He regreted that most of us are instead being motivated by our neg karma to make even more bad cuses, destroying this world (place of opportunity) in the process. He was right about suffering cuz nearly everything on this planet has to kill or destroy to merely exist.
PeaceInSongs 3 years ago
Buddha taught that this is a 'saha' world (world of suffering). And those of us born into it are here because we have made cause in previous existences. he explained there a millions of worlds like this in the Saha system. there are also other higher state worlds where people have made good cause to reach. He said the same differences can be seen in this world - such as better or worse places, circumstances, parents etc to be born.
PeaceInSongs 3 years ago
reincarnation means the energy in your whin you die will pass on to other. just like the energy in the universe passing on.
spacejunkiez 3 years ago
Buddhism is not words it is meditation. If you don´t meditate you will never know what buddism is.
sheraton114 3 years ago
As a Buddhist myself, i like you. However, The Buddha did not say whether there was a God or not or a soul or not, so you can't say that Buddhism is purely an athiest religion, and you can't say whether there is a soul or not. Think your lovely tho mate.
brucinda01 3 years ago
a scientific religion....
djobja 3 years ago