[Buddha-l] Re: flat earth?

[Vicente Gonzalez]

Curt wrote:

c> There also happens to be a major issue here about "western" culture in
c> general, and Batchelor's understanding thereof. In addition to making 
c> Buddhism more scientifical, Batchelor claims to be adapting it to 
c> "western culture". But it turns out he knows about as much about the 
c> history of western culture as he does about the history of science. Some
c> very basic familiarity with the scientific and cultural achievements of
c> classical civilization doesn't seem to be too much to ask from someone
c> with Batchelor's self-proclaimed agenda.

Curt wrote:

c> There also happens to be a major issue here about "western" culture in
c> general, and Batchelor's understanding thereof. In addition to making 
c> Buddhism more scientifical, Batchelor claims to be adapting it to 
c> "western culture". But it turns out he knows about as much about the 
c> history of western culture as he does about the history of science. Some
c> very basic familiarity with the scientific and cultural achievements of
c> classical civilization doesn't seem to be too much to ask from someone
c> with Batchelor's self-proclaimed agenda.

as you sure knows there are many authors who are part of an stream to
redefine a type of Buddhism "without Buddhism". It seems they think
any Religion can be filtered by rational procedures to extract the
"civilizable" contents. I suppose they must be convinced of being
understood the core of the matter or something like that.
When something it's not understood under their own parameter then it
is irrational, a cultural addition, a manipulation, a polemic
addition, etc.. 

That cite to stress the rational in front the irrational it's quite
normal although an extrapolation of our modern mind. Every age gives
to the human being a different position to live. In those ancient
times people talked about worlds and that's all. That problem of being
flat or not was absent because it was not important, and in fact the
"flat earth" idea was only a popular idea. Art was plenty of world
representations using globes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Globus_cruciger
It is as when today people is positioned regarding earth,  galaxies and
only one universe. We have some scientific talking about other
universes as a logical need, although it is not a shared position
for the common people.

Those efforts of some western Buddhist authors to eradicate
the non-rational side of Religions is quite useless, because the
non-rational knowledge is rooted in the same religious impulse.
It is so useless as trying to convince to all the artists of this
world that they must leave painting because photography is the best
representation of reality. I wonder how is possible so many experts
engaged in Religions can be able to forget something so obvious.

Anyway, the stress to forget irrational things is not any guarantee
to get a better human being. This wish can become what Baudelaire said
"the man should be eternal because it is the perfect depredator"
Dr.Mengele or Novartis pharmaceutical they had a rational and a
scientific mind and nobody knows where is exactly their improvement.

Therefore, a main trap is falling in that infantile scenario of
choosing between of dangerous Asiatic priests (supposed ex-supporters
of fascism, irrational, sex abusers, etc..)  and the rational
neo-Buddhist teachers who ignore many things just because they don't
understand them. It seems to be a reflection of these times, in where
we cannot ignore our Reason inheritance while we must rescue our
non-rational component to survive. Probably it is a logical balance to
produce a future thing still unknown, and fanatics of Rationalism or
Esoterics are unavoidable. 

Most times both are united in thinking the rest of humans are stupid.


best regards,