[Buddha-l] Enlightenment as dogma

[lemmett at talk21.com]

> I agree with Stephan that this particular doctrine has many
> of the characteristics of dogma (i.e. unquestioned and
> unquestionable belief) and the analogy to the belief in
> Christ's resurrection is a good one.

But I do think that there's a difference there. I think a non literal reading of Christ's resurrection is one thing and the Buddha's nirvana another because you can get to something much closer to the literal meaning of nirvana while not believing in something incredible. With the resurrection it seems much more like a case of either he did or he didn't. Which reminds me of Schopenhauer and pantheism

"to call the world ‘God’ is not to explain it; it is only to enrich our language with a superfluous synonym for the word ‘world’."

I think I have only met one person who was keen on a non literal reading of that sort of doctrine and I think it may have been a joke.

Thanks...

Luke