[Buddha-l] Bourgeois Buddhism

[Stefan Detrez]

If we can't decide what is Buddhist, how then do we recognize it as such?

Stefan
Op 5 okt. 2011 09:06 schreef "andy" <stroble at hawaii.edu> het volgende:
> Margaret Gouin wrote:
>>
>> Stefan, even in the hardest of hard sciences there is no such thing as
>> 'decisive proof', just stronger or weaker support for propositions.
>>
>> 'Setting up a definition' is rather like making a proposition:
>> IF person A claims to be a Buddhist,
>> THEN we should expect behaviour B
>>
>
> At the least, I would expect Metta, karuna, mudita and upekkha, the
> Brahmavihara, or at least an acknowledgement of falling short of these
ideals.
>
> And this is the point, we are not dealing with hard science here, but with

> doctrine, which can specify a priori. And decisive proofs can follow from
> doctrine, unless that doctrine is proven false. Where does this leave us?
> --
> Andy Stroble,
> University of Hawaii
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l