[Buddha-l] Enlightenment as dogma

[Stefan Detrez]

>
>
> >... (I myself have been told that I can't possible be a buddhist
> >without believing in rebirth, for example). But, the more
> >interesting question, in my opinion, is why would you want to call
> >yourself a ... a "buddhist" and deny such  a central tenet?
>
> But what does "rebirth" mean?  Or "birth" for that matter?
>
> Are you asking why someone who defines "rebirth" differently from
> you  would want to call him- or herself a Buddhist?



> I don't believe in rebirth and have no definition for it applicable to
> myself, but I think you are not a 'complete' Buddhist if you do not accept
> the whole package of Hindu-assumptions and presuppositions, which include
> karma, rebirth, samsara, and even atman.


I must admit I've never thought to ask why he called himself a
Buddhist. Do you suppose I should have?

If you have good reasons to do so, yes.

Stefan