[Buddha-l] Batchelor

[David Living]

>Eric

 

>That about Brahma is just gossip. Besides atheism nowadays means that you don't buy the propaganda about the comicbook monster called Jhvh that was invented 4000 years ago in the Sinai desert. The gods in India and Europe for that matter were more a kind of shady metaphores, who fucked cows, cheated each other and even went for a stroll on earth if they got bored. 

 

I think you'll find that the shady metaphores who strolled around in Europe preferred sheep to cows (that is supposed to be a joke of course).

 

>I know of no place in the canon where the Buddha urges his followers to believe in a god.

 

He doesn't urge his disciples to rely on a god or the gods but neither does he urge his disciples to deny the existence of god(s) which I think you will see is a very important distinction. The Buddha denies a "Creator" god but he does not deny the existence of beings who inhabit a higher plane. Who do you think lives in the "Rupa Loka"? Who do you think lives in the "Arupa Loka"? What about the "Bramavihara" meditations - Metta Compassion etc. No I think you will see that the Buddha was quite happy for people to honour the gods if they felt so inclined so long as they didn't use them to rationalise fanatical persecution. In fact he preferred them to honour the gods than to have no beliefs at all - like us westerners ..... and the Theravadins of course;-) - another silly joke!

 

>Theists are nihilistic, because they believe the life is meaningless without a god.

 

I think you'll find they are eternalistic because they believe/hope often against all the evidence they will live forever in heaven.

 

>That actions have effects we know, but that is called causality.

 

Call it what you like it can still form the basis of a brilliant ethical system. I agree that the concept of a universal law or Natural Law based on a superstitious idea of Karma is a nonsense but - actions motivated by greed and hatred - lead to suffering. Cause and effect or, more Buddhistically - conditionality.

 

>Conversely it is too too dogmatic to say that rebirth and karma cannot exist because they do not fit in with our western atheistic philosophy.
> 
Well, what would you suggest then? To assert their existence not because we believe in them but because others do? You're a lousy debater. 

 

I'd just suggest a less polarised attitude and a slightly more easy-going open minded approach. If that's lousy then you're all doomed! As well as that you will burn in the eternal....no wait a minute I'll just breathe a bit.

 
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell us now
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/195013117/direct/01/