A simple explanation of why Buddhism is correct.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by mkmasn

 

I am not here to convince you.
It's all down to you.

edit on 13-8-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

So again, please explain how direct experience is any different than thoughts, memories, experiences and understanding?

I'm telling you, you and I are saying the same thing in different ways. Your way happens to be very zen-like, my way happens to be more westernized.

reply to post by mkmasn


"Continuing further. If there is no me, as he says, then fear of being hit by the car wouldn't be validated. There would be no pain associated with being hit by the car, death wouldn't really happen, and it all wouldn't matter, yet fear is validated in this situation, as he said."


Can you point me to where he says all this because i am aware that you can miss hear and want to check for myself as this does not sound right to me?

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by mkmasn

 

"Continuing further. If there is no me, as he says, then fear of being hit by the car wouldn't be validated. There would be no pain associated with being hit by the car, death wouldn't really happen, and it all wouldn't matter, yet fear is validated in this situation, as he said."


Can you point me to where he says all this because i am aware that you can miss hear and want to check for myself as this does not sound right to me?

5:17 The epiphany is that there is no me.

reply to post by mkmasn


The 'me' is in time (memories, thoughts, projections of me in past and future).
The only one 'i am' is here and now. I am present for any thing that arises.
But humans think they have to sort out past 'me' problems and future 'me' problems, because they have a me-sense. That me-sense is a fiction.

There is no me. I am the present happening, the present experience and yes, if the present experience is seeing thought thinking about what it imagines to be the past then that is what is happening.
Happening is being. All is happening and you are not separate from it.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by mkmasn

 

The 'me' is in time (memories, thoughts, projections of me in past and future).
The only one 'i am' is here and now. I am present for any thing that arises.
But humans think they have to sort out past 'me' problems and future 'me' problems, because they have a me-sense. That me-sense is a fiction.

edit on 13-8-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

There is no me. I am the present happening, the present experience and yes if the present experience is seeing thought thinking about what it imagines to be the past then that is what is happening.
Happening is being. All is happening and you are not separate from it.

So again, if there is no me, the fear would not be validated, ever.

The problem is, there is a me. It is the culmination of all thoughts, memories, experiences and understanding "me" (I) have up to the present.

Only when you truly understand all of those things, and you may never understand those things because they are constantly changing (hence the need for rebirth in order to achieve Nirvana in the Hindu world), can you truly understand what it means to be and then you can start being.

We are saying the same thing, just in different ways. You believe you are there already, I know I am not.

If you are already there, however, what is keeping you here?

Originally posted by mkmasn

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by mkmasn

 

The 'me' is in time (memories, thoughts, projections of me in past and future).
The only one 'i am' is here and now. I am present for any thing that arises.
But humans think they have to sort out past 'me' problems and future 'me' problems, because they have a me-sense. That me-sense is a fiction.

edit on 13-8-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

So again, if there is no me, the fear would not be validated, ever.

The problem is, there is a me. It is the culmination of all thoughts, memories, experiences and understanding "me" (I) have up to the present.

Only when you truly understand all of those things, and you may never understand those things because they are constantly changing (hence the need for rebirth in order to achieve Nirvana in the Hindu world), can you truly understand what it means to be and then you can start being.

We are saying the same thing, just in different ways. You believe you are there already, I know I am not.

If you are already there, however, what is keeping you here?

Keeping me here? Where else is there?
Fear for my survival has left. I gave 'my' life up and then realized was it not 'mine' anyway.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by mkmasn

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by mkmasn

 

The 'me' is in time (memories, thoughts, projections of me in past and future).
The only one 'i am' is here and now. I am present for any thing that arises.
But humans think they have to sort out past 'me' problems and future 'me' problems, because they have a me-sense. That me-sense is a fiction.

edit on 13-8-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

So again, if there is no me, the fear would not be validated, ever.

The problem is, there is a me. It is the culmination of all thoughts, memories, experiences and understanding "me" (I) have up to the present.

Only when you truly understand all of those things, and you may never understand those things because they are constantly changing (hence the need for rebirth in order to achieve Nirvana in the Hindu world), can you truly understand what it means to be and then you can start being.

We are saying the same thing, just in different ways. You believe you are there already, I know I am not.

If you are already there, however, what is keeping you here?

So can i ask; is life easy?

As opposed to difficult?

Life is neither. Easy and difficult are both an understanding of what has happened.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by mkmasn

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by mkmasn

 

The 'me' is in time (memories, thoughts, projections of me in past and future).
The only one 'i am' is here and now. I am present for any thing that arises.
But humans think they have to sort out past 'me' problems and future 'me' problems, because they have a me-sense. That me-sense is a fiction.

edit on 13-8-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

So again, if there is no me, the fear would not be validated, ever.

The problem is, there is a me. It is the culmination of all thoughts, memories, experiences and understanding "me" (I) have up to the present.

Only when you truly understand all of those things, and you may never understand those things because they are constantly changing (hence the need for rebirth in order to achieve Nirvana in the Hindu world), can you truly understand what it means to be and then you can start being.

We are saying the same thing, just in different ways. You believe you are there already, I know I am not.

If you are already there, however, what is keeping you here?

Keeping me here? Where else is there?

edit on 13-8-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

Everything.

Originally posted by mkmasn

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Originally posted by mkmasn

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by mkmasn

 

The 'me' is in time (memories, thoughts, projections of me in past and future).
The only one 'i am' is here and now. I am present for any thing that arises.
But humans think they have to sort out past 'me' problems and future 'me' problems, because they have a me-sense. That me-sense is a fiction.

edit on 13-8-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

So again, if there is no me, the fear would not be validated, ever.

The problem is, there is a me. It is the culmination of all thoughts, memories, experiences and understanding "me" (I) have up to the present.

Only when you truly understand all of those things, and you may never understand those things because they are constantly changing (hence the need for rebirth in order to achieve Nirvana in the Hindu world), can you truly understand what it means to be and then you can start being.

We are saying the same thing, just in different ways. You believe you are there already, I know I am not.

If you are already there, however, what is keeping you here?

Keeping me here? Where else is there?

edit on 13-8-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

Everything.

This does not compute.

reply to post by mkmasn


Sorry, that's rubbish. Man can never become God. God is the creator, giver of life and death, omnipotent, eternal. Man can never get close to what God is. He can possibly get close to understanding some element to God (And in the process enlighten ourselves), but never understand God nor ever become God.

Originally posted by JasonT
reply to post by mkmasn

 

Sorry, that's rubbish. Man can never become God. God is the creator, giver of life and death, omnipotent, eternal. Man can never get close to what God is. He can possibly get close to understanding some element to God (And in the process enlighten ourselves), but never understand God nor ever become God.

Man is already God. Man just needs to reattain the lost knowledge. What is omnipotence, really? All knowledge.

With knowledge comes the ability to create and change, i.e. power.

Matthew 16:19
I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

reply to post by JasonT


Man is a creator and giver of life and death, our potential is unlimited and we are discovering something new every day, we are also eternal because our bodies may die but our souls never do.

The reason you think we are not god is because we have lost touch with ourselves, we are caught up in the material world, e.g. the next Iphone or paycheck. We have lost touch with what really makes us us, the non-material, the spirit.

reply to post by mkmasn


Short, yet sweet. We as humans need to stop debating if IT'S is real or not. We passed those ages long ago. Only thing is, that for every one that wakes up, 1 or 2 fall asleep. What we neeed to focus on now is living a good life not only living a good life but spreading the good life! Those extreamly wealthy families don't care if you live or die! In a world where everything has a price tag, you have to stop and realize we ourselfs are for sale too! U think slavery ended a while back? Take a look at what JFK said....

world peace is impossible unless everyone litteratly stops what their doing or if everyone physically dies. Now what do you think THEY propose? We humans act like were so dam special because we know something others don't, we have something others don't, and if we don't have it, we can make or buy our own...no matter what you do, or where you go, your going to die where your supposed to

reply to post by mkmasn


Not sure I'm following all of your logic but I will say this,..

Buddhist are the ONLY people I've met that were NEVER odious cretins like those from nearly all other religions whom constantly are trying to explain to me how I'm not saved & I'm a sinner & how I can only be saved by joining/praying to deity of the religion of those who proselytize it & pay for it. Beware of gurus manning toll-booths.

Christians & Muslims of every stripe can not claim this level of cool-headedness, not even Jews. Remember, I'm talking about MY experience with all you yahoos.

If I was an alien, judge/god entity in charge of eliminating all but one faith from this planet, Buddhists would be safe.

The rest of the religions would be forbidden under the idea that no religion should harm another person & most of them are chock-full of, "my god is bigger/better than your god" mentalities.

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

reply to post by mkmasn

 

I don't think Jesus ever existed. My reasoning is this:

You can deny His claims to divinity, but you cannot logically deny His existence in the flesh and blood. His death is the most documented death in human history. Atheist historians don't even venture to deny His life and death on a Roman cross.

Dr. Richard Carrier, a PhD in Ancient History from Columbia, says Jesus never existed.

reply to post by Pagedisciple


Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is a "right" or "wrong" belief system, I can only say the premise behind Buddhism to be correct.

I'm not a Christian, Muslim or Jew, but I don't know if I'd consider myself a Buddhist, either. I just don't know.

If there is a God or higher power of some sort, I would have to say upon death we are ultimately reunited with that creator. But it seems to me there has to be a way to reach that state while living, as well. Enlightenment is the closest thing I can fathom.

Originally posted by mkmasn
So again, if there is no me, the fear would not be validated, ever.

The problem is, there is a me. It is the culmination of all thoughts, memories, experiences and understanding "me" (I) have up to the present.

Only when you truly understand all of those things, and you may never understand those things because they are constantly changing (hence the need for rebirth in order to achieve Nirvana in the Hindu world), can you truly understand what it means to be and then you can start being.

We are saying the same thing, just in different ways. You believe you are there already, I know I am not.

If you are already there, however, what is keeping you here?

edit on 13-8-2012 by mkmasn because: (no reason given)

The 'me' you 'think' you are is not what you are. The thoughts and memories are appearances to what you are. What you are is here in the present always and you see images appearing. The images of 'past and future' flash up presently because nothing can be seen or heard any 'other time' than now.
You believe you have accumulated something 'along the way' (in time) called a 'person'. You believe you are a person in time. If this is what you believe this is what your experience will be. 'I am a person in time that was born and will die'. You now have let's say 80 years of worry. From where you believe you are you look back at your past and look forward to future. The belief is 'I must protect my life'.

The belief that life can be taken from me and the attachment to what i have accumulated and what i will get (in time) is what makes conflict. The belief is that i have something and that i am something and i will protect what's 'mine'. This causes the fighting and defending. Believing that you are a 'person in time' causes the feeling of lack, loss and general uneasiness that people feel. This sets up the feeling that there is something missing so people go out to fill that hole, they have to steal from 'others' to fill the hole and fight with 'others' so nothing gets taken from them.
Only when it is realized that 'i am not a person in time' will you feel whole. Only when you find out what you really are will that feeling of lack dissolve.

Attitude of a Buddhism student:
•To view ourselves as a critically ill person
•To view the teaching that is being offered to us as a treatment for our illness.
•To view the teacher as a skilled doctor.

Originally posted by mkmasn
reply to post by Pagedisciple

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think there is a "right" or "wrong" belief system, I can only say the premise behind Buddhism to be correct.

I'm not a Christian, Muslim or Jew, but I don't know if I'd consider myself a Buddhist, either. I just don't know.

If there is a God or higher power of some sort, I would have to say upon death we are ultimately reunited with that creator. But it seems to me there has to be a way to reach that state while living, as well. Enlightenment is the closest thing I can fathom.

What is the premise behind Buddhism?

reply to post by mkmasn


Hello mkmasn!
I believe that the truth of the matter should be best decided on the evidence. Here is what I propose. I propose a debate on whether the Resurrection of Jesus probably happened historically. We will be using the same historiographical guidelines for examining evidence providing theories that secular historians use. Here is why I think this matters. If Jesus did rise from the dead, then Biblical Christianity is true (therefore Buddhism is false since they are opposed to each other) since Christianity hinges on the Resurrection. If he didn't, then Christianity is false. That simple.

I would like this to be a discussion between the two of us. I hate chasing arguments down 50 different bunny trails. We can even set it up with ground rules (ie 10 rounds for each side, word limit per post, etc). Since I am taking the affirmative side (that Jesus' Resurrection probably happened historically), I would have the opening statement, etc. What do you say?

reply to post by bibledefender


Who says the Christ story is in opposition to Buddhism?

This BBC documentary might be of interest:
Jesus Was a Buddhist Monk:
youtu.be...