6 minutes ago, moogradod said:

You may call it religion if you like. Does not change a thing. But a common misunderstanding arises when you do not realize that this is a non-theistic religion which distinguishes it from for example Christianity and which is at the core of many discussions I have read here (believing in something invisible etc.). Both are valid attempts to find a solution to make people ultimately happy though even their view on a "creator god" is totally different.

You're wrong.

If they pray, they believe Buddha is a creator god.

Mine is very devout and prays to Kali as an incarnation of Buddha.

 

I class all superstitions, gods and magical thinking as a form of mental illness.

No point in discussing the finer points of the mentally ill.

20 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I don't regard Buddhism as a religion, more a set of ethical and moral principles.

It is still a religion by any definition.

It also has different and varying sects and practices - but it is a religion, God or no God.

a lot of the pronouncements on Buddhism here are showing the kind of ignorance from which racism stems.

13 hours ago, kwilco said:

Your literal and largely incorrect interpretation of so many posts makes me wonder if you actually understand even the basics of the topic and many of the subsequent opinions voiced.

 

You missed the sarcasm and tongue in cheek aspect of my post .

I realised from your reply that you didn't understand what that "rule" meant and I replied in a similar fashion 

32 minutes ago, moogradod said:

some say it is more like the science of the mind.

What do you mean?? - Buddhism is a religion - it has no science.

4 minutes ago, kwilco said:

It is still a religion by any definition.

It also has different and varying sects and practices - but it is a religion, God or no God.

a lot of the pronouncements on Buddhism here are showing the kind of ignorance from which racism stems.

You obviously did not read my posts carefully enough or did interpret them in a certain way. But you are right that intolerance is for sure not a reason for a happier existence.

7 minutes ago, kwilco said:

It is still a religion by any definition.

It also has different and varying sects and practices - but it is a religion, God or no God.

a lot of the pronouncements on Buddhism here are showing the kind of ignorance from which racism stems.

Nothing to do with your favourite word , there are some people who do not consider Buddhism to be a Religion because Buddhism  does not have a God and they consider it to be a philosophy .

   Some people have a differing opinions on whether Buddhism is a Religion or not  and nothing to do with racism  

13 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

You're wrong.

If they pray, they believe Buddha is a creator god.

Mine is very devout and prays to Kali as an incarnation of Buddha.

 

I class all superstitions, gods and magical thinking as a form of mental illness.

No point in discussing the finer points of the mentally ill.

Anybody may believe what he wants. This does not make it more valid. What you say in your first paragraph is simply not part of the Buddhist Teachings which I have studied for many decades.

 

Your second paragraph is a reflexion of your acquired mindset for which there is really no point of discussing.

E.G - heres a quote from Mack Mickmanus from another thread.

"Lets face it , if you turned Liz Truss into an atom and also turned Kwasi Kwarteng into an atom and put them both into the hadron collider and sent them in different directions , when they collide , Diane Abbot would appear as the result "

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1275073-ill-lead-tories-into-next-election-says-embattled-liz-truss/?do=findComment&comment=17674552

 

3 minutes ago, kwilco said:

E.G - heres a quote from Mack Mickmanus from another thread.

"Lets face it , if you turned Liz Truss into an atom and also turned Kwasi Kwarteng into an atom and put them both into the hadron collider and sent them in different directions , when they collide , Diane Abbot would appear as the result "

 

https://aseannow.com/topic/1275073-ill-lead-tories-into-next-election-says-embattled-liz-truss/?do=findComment&comment=17674552

 

Thank you, I though of that joke myself .

Why did you repost it here though ?

1 hour ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Nothing to do with your favourite word , there are some people who do not consider Buddhism to be a Religion because Buddhism  does not have a God and they consider it to be a philosophy .

   Some people have a differing opinions on whether Buddhism is a Religion or not  and nothing to do with racism  

Religion - a cultural system of behaviours, practices and ethics.- you don't need a "god".

 

Why do you say "favourite word"?

4 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Religion - a cultural system of behaviours, practices and ethics.- you don't need a "god".

 

Why do you say "favourite word"?

That is one persons opinion of what "Religion " means , other people have a different opinion .

   

1 hour ago, moogradod said:

You obviously did not read my posts carefully enough or did interpret them in a certain way. But you are right that intolerance is for sure not a reason for a happier existence.

Ouch.

24 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Religion - a cultural system of behaviours, practices and ethics.- you don't need a "god".

 

Why do you say "favourite word"?

Oxford Dictionaries defines religion as the belief in and/or worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods

33 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Oxford Dictionaries defines religion as the belief in and/or worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods

"especially" - you not understand?

5 minutes ago, kwilco said:

"especially" - you not understand?

You are claiming religions don't need a god, 3 out of the 4 main ones do.

11 hours ago, moogradod said:

You may call it religion if you like. Does not change a thing. But a common misunderstanding arises when you do not realize that this is a non-theistic religion which distinguishes it from for example Christianity and which is at the core of many discussions I have read here (believing in something invisible etc.). Both are valid attempts to find a solution to make people ultimately happy though even their view on a "creator god" is totally different.

I wasn't aware that NIrvana was a real place ( believing in something invisible etc. ).

11 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Nothing to do with your favourite word , there are some people who do not consider Buddhism to be a Religion because Buddhism  does not have a God and they consider it to be a philosophy .

   Some people have a differing opinions on whether Buddhism is a Religion or not  and nothing to do with racism  

When people pray it sure seems like a religion to me. If they don't believe in a higher power, who would they be praying to exactly?

13 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I wasn't aware that NIrvana was a real place ( believing in something invisible etc. ).

I used the phrase "believing in something invisible etc." only to point to the posters who have abbreviated beliefs or beliefs that reflect a more materialistic (and sometimes stubborn) view. "What I cannot see does not exist" is such an example. As all such generalizations and abbreviations with the aim to emphasize a certain aspect for the only reason to make it more understandable are prone to discussions. But in this case it is moot to discuss these merely grammatical meaning. Not of importance. I guess my remark did even introduce more unclarity. This was not the intention and my mistake.

 

You introduce as well the idea, that Nirvana (as something that cannot be seen you mean I suppose) is a real place. Instead of starting a sermon on this really sophisticated topic I would like to invite you to find out for yourself of what is real and what is not and what is both and what is neither.

 

I would suggest that you consult first Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika which may be regarded as the starting point of the Mahayana Madhyamaka Prasangika Teachings. Followed by the the commentaries of Shantaraksh*ta and Chandrakirti on that treatise (because without commentary I have strong doubts that you would understand one word of Nagarjuna).

 

The books are very well translated into English using the high standards of the Padmakara Translation Group, at least some. Very worthwile reading. Please be prepared to be confronted with a thousand pages and years of study. But how our world works on various levels is definitely not the easiest subject, and you do not expect an easy answer, do you. And not on AN I suppose - in a thread or post. Good luck.

57 minutes ago, moogradod said:

I used the phrase "believing in something invisible etc." only to point to the posters who have abbreviated beliefs or beliefs that reflect a more materialistic (and sometimes stubborn) view. "What I cannot see does not exist" is such an example.

Thai Buddhists pray for money, luck, lottery numbers, death to their enemies, etc.

Which makes it a religion, end of!

11 hours ago, moogradod said:

I used the phrase "believing in something invisible etc." only to point to the posters who have abbreviated beliefs or beliefs that reflect a more materialistic (and sometimes stubborn) view. "What I cannot see does not exist" is such an example. As all such generalizations and abbreviations with the aim to emphasize a certain aspect for the only reason to make it more understandable are prone to discussions. But in this case it is moot to discuss these merely grammatical meaning. Not of importance. I guess my remark did even introduce more unclarity. This was not the intention and my mistake.

 

You introduce as well the idea, that Nirvana (as something that cannot be seen you mean I suppose) is a real place. Instead of starting a sermon on this really sophisticated topic I would like to invite you to find out for yourself of what is real and what is not and what is both and what is neither.

 

I would suggest that you consult first Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika which may be regarded as the starting point of the Mahayana Madhyamaka Prasangika Teachings. Followed by the the commentaries of Shantaraksh*ta and Chandrakirti on that treatise (because without commentary I have strong doubts that you would understand one word of Nagarjuna).

 

The books are very well translated into English using the high standards of the Padmakara Translation Group, at least some. Very worthwile reading. Please be prepared to be confronted with a thousand pages and years of study. But how our world works on various levels is definitely not the easiest subject, and you do not expect an easy answer, do you. And not on AN I suppose - in a thread or post. Good luck.

I have been an active participant on the Do you believe in God thread since the  start of it.

If I can't understand much of the discussion when it gets into ancient texts, there is little point in me investigating such as you provide, but thank you for the information. Others may be interested.

While I do believe in God, far as I'm concerned Nirvana has to wait till I cross the great divide and embark on my last great adventure as a human.

10 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Thai Buddhists pray for money, luck, lottery numbers, death to their enemies, etc.

Which makes it a religion, end of!

While the Buddha himself would disagree, IMO the Thais certainly believe it's a religion, but I understand they adapted many aspects of Hinduism into the way they practice their version of Buddhism.

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

While the Buddha himself would disagree, IMO the Thais certainly believe it's a religion, but I understand they adapted many aspects of Hinduism into the way they practice their version of Buddhism.

Yes, he would definitely disagree. Lets as well not forget that we are talking here about Buddhism as a whole in its very vast shades, not only Thai Theravada Buddhism. Besides the Thai do really pray for Buddha for lottery numbers etc. But this is a mislead behaviour and has nothing to do with the Buddhist teaching which is aimed at  eradicating suffering (and not contribute to it).

 

They pray as well to Ganesha and other Hindu gods (think Erawan Shrine in BKK) and they have their own local animistic beliefs in spirits and practises. But this is all not Buddhism and should not be regarded as a part thereof only because it takes place in Thailand. To have several philosophies flourishing in a country side by side is not at all uncommon. There is for example Japan with many following Shinto practises while they are Buddhist.

 

It has always been the aim of Buddhist representatives to keep the teaching as pure as possible (this does not equate to static - learning is always possible) although even when Buddhism was introduced to Tibet the local Bön Tradition had a strong influence to form what is today known as "Tibetan Buddhism".

On 10/18/2022 at 12:30 PM, Mac Mickmanus said:

That is true .

If I see a Black person, I cannot tell as to whether they come from the Caribbean of Africa , they do look the same to me 

I had some recent experience of that in regards to renting out rooms .

I advertised a room n line and received numerous responses and one response was from a woman in Nigeria coming over to the U.K for the first time to study at Uni and we spoke quite a bit online and I told her to come and visit next week after she arrives in the UK on Monday morning and a few other people made enquires and told them to come around Monday morning for a viewing as well .

   Monday morning and I get a knock at the front door and it was a young Black Woman and I invited her in and showed her around and had a chat with her and she was attending University .

   I asked her how She liked England and how was life in Nigeria and she kind of shrugged her shoulders .

  I was going on about how it gets cold in the UK , unlike in Nigeria wheres usually hot .

  "How was your flight over"

"When will you be going back to Nigeria"

Not much response .

Then she said that she "actually flew in from Dublin" 

I asked her what She was doing in Ireland and she said that her Nigerian Father worked there .

  I said "So you went from Nigeria to Dublin to London"

I asked her how long She had been in Ireland for .

She said "20 years".

I asked her "What was you doing in Nigeria".

She then told me that She had never been to Nigeria and that She was Irish and born in Ireland .

   Then it suddenly clicked .

"Did I speak to you last week online "

"No"

.................................."So you arent the woman from Nigeria"?

"No, I am from Ireland "

Right..........................OK , I seem to have got my wires crossed .

I apologised 

 

"How racism, xenophobia and religious discrimination were woven into the fabric of the UK"

Faux outrage.

IMO, the UK doesn't have this type of behavior woven in, perhaps a little bit of fluff lingering in a pocket from a bygone era.

However, voicing disapproval and taking action over illegal immigration is a completely different topic.

 

On 10/13/2022 at 2:28 PM, Hanaguma said:

The point of asylum is to seek a temporary refuge, until their native land is safe to return to. It isn't a backdoor to permanent immigration.  

No, they hear the UK is stupid enough to give them loads of money, why aren't they coming to Thailand? 

Kick them all out. 

13 hours ago, Paul Catton said:

 

IMO, the UK doesn't have this type of behavior woven in, perhaps a little bit of fluff lingering in a pocket from a bygone era.

However, voicing disapproval and taking action over illegal immigration is a completely different topic.

 

On 10/23/2022 at 12:53 PM, Paul Catton said:

"How racism, xenophobia and religious discrimination were woven into the fabric of the UK"

Faux outrage.

IMO, the UK doesn't have this type of behavior woven in, perhaps a little bit of fluff lingering in a pocket from a bygone era.

However, voicing disapproval and taking action over illegal immigration is a completely different topic.

 

Indeed. However we live in an age when some are looking to find something/ anything, no matter how many rocks they have to look under, to be outraged about.

They see fault where others see nothing much to get exercised about ( that reminds me of the Bruce Willis movie about the boy that saw ghosts ).

22 hours ago, Neeranam said:

No, they hear the UK is stupid enough to give them loads of money, why aren't they coming to Thailand? 

Kick them all out. 

More to the point, they are already in France, a country that is "safe", so what is it about France that makes them risk leaky rubber boats to get to a country that some think is institutionally racist?

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Indeed. However we live in an age when some are looking to find something/ anything, no matter how many rocks they have to look under, to be outraged about.

They see fault where others see nothing much to get exercised about ( that reminds me of the Bruce Willis movie about the boy that saw ghosts ).

We have evidence here.

 

People looking to be offended over the a discussion of factual racism in the UK.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

We have evidence here.

 

People looking to be offended over the a discussion of factual racism in the UK.

 

 

Cannot see any evidence of offence here, seeing discussion, and rightly so.

Faux outrage at its finest.