[Buddha-l] Bourgeois Buddhism

[Federico Andino]

It is a fact only in a fixed point in time. It may waver, but the
continuation of it would make a way of life, I think.

F

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Erik Hoogcarspel <jehms at xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On 06-10-11 13:20, Federico Andino wrote:
>>> I detect at least three approaches. One is scientific, as Federico has laid it
>>> out. The other is a practictioner,  as I believe Jack gave us earlier.  But
>>> then there is the philosophical, where we want to know not only what is the
>>> case, and what works, but what is true, or at least self-consistent.
>>>
>>> This brings me back to my earlier question, why is the Buddhadharma different?
>>> --
>>> Andy Stroble,
>>> _______________________________________________
>> In a philosophical context, self-consistent does not necessarily equals truth.
>> So something can be inconsisten and true, like kinds of buddhism or my
>> comitment to diet.
>>
> I think this is  a false comparison. Your commitment is a fact and not a
> way of life.
> According to the Buddha is that what his teaching made difficult to
> understand the concept of pratItyasamutpAda, which was a step away from
> the existing concepts of causal relationship.
>
> erik
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>