Why More And More People Accepting Buddhism ?

[healthcaretaker]

I like to start my message with this story:

Not long ago, I travel to Lumbini, the birthplace of the Lord Buddha. In one of the temple(forgot which country's, more likely the China one) I saw a group of western ladies dressed in white and they look like there are not just there for a short visit like me. One of them happened to give me a smile when I am photographing the interiors and nearly blocked her way; .

and I apologised. I took the opportunity to ask here some questions since I am very curious on her religion(explain more later). Here's the short conversation:

I asked. "Excuse me, may I know are you a Buddhist ?"(I am curious since she is in white(why she convert ?) and in Singapore, Malaysia & Phillipines, Christians are taught NOT to accept Buddhism, in fact, many condemn lotus, joss-sticks and the Buddha statue and consider these 3 are works of evil).

She hesitated a second or 2 and replied, "I am not a Buddhist yet, I am just interested to learn more about it".

Unsatisfied with the answer, I quickly followed up by asking, "Are you a Christian then ?"

"Yes, I am", she replied.

At this moment, my impatience and curiousity got over me. I quickly said, "I am VERY surprise. Don't Christianity condemn Buddhism ? In my country and some in Asia, the Christians don't accept Buddhism at all, in fact, they actually prohibit any Buddhism practice, and some elderly Buddhist or Taoist Chinese are worried that when they pass away, their Christian child or grand childwill not hold the josstick or even kneel down to pray, as in Chinese culture".

She look at me with a sincere face and replied, "I believe not all Christians behave that way, at least not in our western countries"

Unfortunately I cannot stay any longer as my travel partner is waiting for me outside and we must go. I thanked her for the short conversation and leave, satisfied.

It give me even greater curiousity as to why my christians friends have so much against Buddhism. The answer is quite obvious. Asians christians are mostly not born but converted, so they may be afraid that these Asians may go back to Buddhism. If they can be converted once easily, they can convert again.

Now back to my OP, I think more people(today) accept Buddhism because the main reason is related to science, logic and good reasons; unlike some religion(s) that simply believe in a an unreasonable belief like, no questions to be asked, nothing to bebate. Anwers are always, ".....because our Book said that........" or ".....God.......did this or did that......" as answers.

As people are getting more learned today, they don't simply join a religion because of a carrot in statements like....."you join us,...you will go to heaven after death, otherwise you will go to hell".....or "Pray to god, you will get a better life"-types of unreasonable reasons.

Furthermore, discovery by science has proved that many claims made by some religions are totally false. I think this is the main reason some followers leave, whether to join Buddhism or not.

As for me, I don't buy the logic that some religions painted God as being so unreasonable or even weak.

How could God allow evil to exist if he is almighty and how could God be so unreasonable to only love those who believe in him and not those who don't.

Furthermore, if God really created humans, why don't he create them perfectly well, or at least be fair and same for everyone ?

So many of these questions cannot be answered(in a reasonable manner) in other religions, unlike the Karma theory in Buddhism.

I believe that God(if he existed) merely created the Big Bang and everything else is not beyond his control.

Just some of my simple logic in my reasearch so far, I wonder what the others think ?:jap:

[rockyysdt]

On this subject, my Christian relative indicated that the Buddha is a false idol.

He concluded that anything to do with the Buddha will lead one down the wrong path.

Just as you believe Buddhism is the way, he is fully devoted to his Lord (Jesus) and apparent scientific anomalies which appear to disprove passages in the bible are beyond our comprehension.

I personally follow Buddhism and subcribe to the 4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Noble Path.

Having said that, if you really analyze it, many aspects of Buddhism are also scientifically unproven and require a level of faith.

The Buddha said not to accept his word but to find out for oneself but he also said one must have some level of faith.

Aspects of Buddhism which are unproven are:

• Re Birth
• Khamma
• Enlightenment.
• Nirvana

We have no memory of previous lives, and when suffering we can't tell whether it's due to the fruits of Khamma or due to misfortune or bad luck.

Also enlightenment appears to be a rare event.

Those who are said to achieve Arahantship or become Enlightened appear to follow a code where they do not divulge their experience.

It has been said that the only way is to experience it for oneself.

One can devote a lifetime to practice and fail to become enlightened.

This will be the result for the majority who practice.

Having said that, mindfulness, & meditation are very powerful tools and can help one live a fuller and happier life.

Practicing loving kindness reduces much suffering and touches many hearts.

Right view and right action, universally practiced, would bring peace to our world.

One must decide whether to embrace Buddhism (4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Noble Path) or in the absence of scientific proof, plunder its proven qualities(mindfulness, meditation, charity, loving kindness, & morality) without the religious aspects.

We must choose carefully.

Edited December 22, 2010 by rockyysdt

[healthcaretaker]

On this subject, my Christian relative indicated that the Buddha is a false idol.

He concluded that anything to do with the Buddha will lead one down the wrong path.

Just as you believe Buddhism is the way, he is fully devoted to his Lord (Jesus) and apparent scientific anomalies which appear to disprove passages in the bible are beyond our comprehension.

I personally follow Buddhism and subcribe to the 4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Noble Path.

Having said that, if you really analyze it, many aspects of Buddhism are also scientifically unproven and require a level of faith.

The Buddha said not to accept his word but to find out for oneself but he also said one must have some level of faith.

Aspects of Buddhism which are unproven are:

• Re Birth
• Khamma
• Enlightenment.
• Nirvana

We have no memory of previous lives, and when suffering we can't tell whether it's due to the fruits of Khamma or due to misfortune or bad luck.

Also enlightenment appears to be a rare event.

Those who are said to achieve Arahantship or become Enlightened appear to follow a code where they do not divulge their experience.

It has been said that the only way is to experience it for oneself.

One can devote a lifetime to practice and fail to become enlightened.

This will be the result for the majority who practice.

Having said that, mindfulness, & meditation are very powerful tools and can help one live a fuller and happier life.

Practicing loving kindness reduces much suffering and touches many hearts.

Right view and right action, universally practiced, would bring peace to our world.

One must decide whether to embrace Buddhism (4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Noble Path) or in the absence of scientific proof, plunder its proven qualities(mindfulness, meditation, charity, loving kindness, & morality) without the religious aspects.

We must choose carefully.

Thanks for the reply and yes I agree with you those aspects of Buddhism have been uproven by science but it's not proven wrong by science too.(unike some claims of other religion).

I think in times to come, science will be able to prove whether they are true or false. Meanwhile everyone can only think about it based on some logic and happenings.

I think I have some answers to some of those 4 on how the Lord Buddha got his theories. I have been researching it for years from a scientific approach and come to some uinderstanding. Let me think how to put it up here so that others can understand what I am trying to say.

In order for science to prove something, it must be something "seeable", "measurable", "accountable", "experimentable" and most importantly "repeatable" and "constant".

At this moment, scientific equipment has not reached such ability to perform yet. So spirits and souls, for example, cannot be seen, thus, cannot be proven.

Maybe Buddhism is far ahead of time.

I think another reason why people are following Buddhism is the fact that teachings and behaviours of Buddhism are reasonable, logic and nothing(in it) claimed has been proven false or fake. This is most important. When people has problems following its Path and understanding one's problem, they can solve their problems. This is something people cannot learn in school or other religions.

[healthcaretaker]

On this subject, my Christian relative indicated that the Buddha is a false idol.

He concluded that anything to do with the Buddha will lead one down the wrong path.

Just as you believe Buddhism is the way, he is fully devoted to his Lord (Jesus) and apparent scientific anomalies which appear to disprove passages in the bible are beyond our comprehension.

I personally follow Buddhism and subcribe to the 4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Noble Path.

Having said that, if you really analyze it, many aspects of Buddhism are also scientifically unproven and require a level of faith.

The Buddha said not to accept his word but to find out for oneself but he also said one must have some level of faith.

Aspects of Buddhism which are unproven are:

• Re Birth
• Khamma
• Enlightenment.
• Nirvana

We have no memory of previous lives, and when suffering we can't tell whether it's due to the fruits of Khamma or due to misfortune or bad luck.

Also enlightenment appears to be a rare event.

Those who are said to achieve Arahantship or become Enlightened appear to follow a code where they do not divulge their experience.

It has been said that the only way is to experience it for oneself.

One can devote a lifetime to practice and fail to become enlightened.

This will be the result for the majority who practice.

Having said that, mindfulness, & meditation are very powerful tools and can help one live a fuller and happier life.

Practicing loving kindness reduces much suffering and touches many hearts.

Right view and right action, universally practiced, would bring peace to our world.

One must decide whether to embrace Buddhism (4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Noble Path) or in the absence of scientific proof, plunder its proven qualities(mindfulness, meditation, charity, loving kindness, & morality) without the religious aspects.

We must choose carefully.

I forget to ask why your friend, a christian claim that Buddha is a false idol ? In what way is it false ? If Buddha is false, what makes him/her think JC is not false ?

Why anything to do with Buddha will lead down one the wrong path ? What is "wrong" ?

I think one cannot simply say or claim, must have some reasons to support, right ?

Hope you can "enlighten" your innocent or ignorant friend.:jap:

[phetaroi]

Some thoughts in general:

1. On a nation-by-nation basis, it appears that Buddhism is growing.

2. On a world-wide basis, I could find little data to support any very significant growth in Buddhism (the data I found indicated numbers of Buddhists worldwide to be "stable" or to have grown 1.9% or 2.1% on a 5 year basis, which could be real growth, or could be in the way the numbers were arrived at). For example, if you simply interview people in China, they might not be willing to admit their religious beliefs, therefore skewing the data.

3. One article suggested it was very difficult to compare numbers of Buddhists to numbers of some other religions, because some religions are more congregational than others, Buddhism being one of the least congregational.

4. I am wary of the numbers game because I'm not clear what people espousing such numbers are trying to gain. Religious competition? Hopefully not, because if that's the game, the fastest growing religion appears to be Islam at a growth rate of around 22%. Besides which, I don't see why spirituality has to be a contest. And, what does saying you are Buddhist (or any other religion) actually mean? All of my Thai friends say they are Buddhist, yet only a small percentage of them ever go to a Buddhist temple unless someone has died. Many have little real knowledge of Buddhist history or true Buddhist principles.

5. The OP continues to persist that science has proven Buddhism. I suggest he do a Google search of "scientific proof for buddhism" and see if there is any widespread belief of that. Instead, what he will find is constant arguing and bickering on the topic.

Thanks to Rocky for another wise discourse.

[lungmi]

You will find some answers for your questions.

http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/good_evil_beyond.pdf

http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/The_Role_of_Faith_in_Science_and_Buddhism_by_Bhikkhu_P._A._Payutto

http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/Religion_and_Science_by_Bhikkhu_P._A._Payutto

[camerata]

I've looked into the numbers a couple of times and couldn't find anything meaningful about the growth of Buddhism. Of the two very populous nations that previously had a lot of Buddhists, it's impossible to get sensible figures for Japan, whereas in China many people are rediscovering Buddhism now they are allowed to.

I checked into the oft-repeated claim that Buddhism is "the fastest growing religion in Australia" and found figures that proved the reason was immigration from Asia rather than conversion from other beliefs.

If anything, there is a fresh interest in Buddhism among mostly educated Westerners as a reaction to the extreme materialism of the West, but I doubt it adds up to significant growth worldwide.

[lungmi]

I've looked into the numbers a couple of times and couldn't find anything meaningful about the growth of Buddhism. Of the two very populous nations that previously had a lot of Buddhists, it's impossible to get sensible figures for Japan, whereas in China many people are rediscovering Buddhism now they are allowed to.

I checked into the oft-repeated claim that Buddhism is "the fastest growing religion in Australia" and found figures that proved the reason was immigration from Asia rather than conversion from other beliefs.

If anything, there is a fresh interest in Buddhism among mostly educated Westerners as a reaction to the extreme materialism of the West, but I doubt it adds up to significant growth worldwide.

When my son studied in Taiwan he lived in a Taiwanese family. Every Sunday they went in a different temple or church (Confucius, Tao, Mahayana, Amithaba, Catholic, Protestant, etc.) Why ? The family said: We are pragmatic Chinese, we use the temples and churches like different insurances against bad luck. I think this is at a lower level a common attitude. How to classify the religious affiliation correctly? In Germany and France of people accepting Buddhism increases, the members of green parties (environment policies) use very often Buddhist arguments.

[rockyysdt]

I forget to ask why your friend, a christian claim that Buddha is a false idol ? In what way is it false ? If Buddha is false, what makes him/her think JC is not false ?

Why anything to do with Buddha will lead down one the wrong path ? What is "wrong" ?

I think one cannot simply say or claim, must have some reasons to support, right ?

Hope you can "enlighten" your innocent or ignorant friend.:jap:

I find most people start with a belief and look for things to substantiate it.

They seldom view things impartially and let their research give them the answer.

I'd imagine they would say the same thing about you.

They've indicated that worshiping an idol, other than God/Jesus is false, therefore making a statue of the Buddha a false idol to them.

[rockyysdt]

Thanks for the reply and yes I agree with you those aspects of Buddhism have been uproven by science but it's not proven wrong by science too.(unike some claims of other religion).

I think in times to come, science will be able to prove whether they are true or false. Meanwhile everyone can only think about it based on some logic and happenings.

I think I have some answers to some of those 4 on how the Lord Buddha got his theories. I have been researching it for years from a scientific approach and come to some uinderstanding. Let me think how to put it up here so that others can understand what I am trying to say.

In order for science to prove something, it must be something "seeable", "measurable", "accountable", "experimentable" and most importantly "repeatable" and "constant".

At this moment, scientific equipment has not reached such ability to perform yet. So spirits and souls, for example, cannot be seen, thus, cannot be proven.

Maybe Buddhism is far ahead of time.

I think another reason why people are following Buddhism is the fact that teachings and behaviours of Buddhism are reasonable, logic and nothing(in it) claimed has been proven false or fake. This is most important. When people has problems following its Path and understanding one's problem, they can solve their problems. This is something people cannot learn in school or other religions.

Although not disproven, khamma, re birth, enlightenment & nirvana are only one possibility of what the ultimate truth might constitute.

Until proven such things can only be thought of as beliefs.

The proven aspects of Buddhism, such as mindfulness, meditation, right view & right speech are what makes Buddhism a noble philosophy.

The esoteric aspects mentioned above lead people to view Buddhism as a religion.

I don't know why people are turning to Buddhism.

I personally started with meditation and deep relaxation as a way of overcoming anxiety.

This exposed me to Buddhism and I seemed to have naturally progress.

The Buddha invited us to try it for ourselves.

In the absence of viable alternative I'm giving it a go.

Edited December 23, 2010 by rockyysdt

[lungmi]

Thanks for the reply and yes I agree with you those aspects of Buddhism have been uproven by science but it's not proven wrong by science too.(unike some claims of other religion).

I think in times to come, science will be able to prove whether they are true or false. Meanwhile everyone can only think about it based on some logic and happenings.

I think I have some answers to some of those 4 on how the Lord Buddha got his theories. I have been researching it for years from a scientific approach and come to some uinderstanding. Let me think how to put it up here so that others can understand what I am trying to say.

In order for science to prove something, it must be something "seeable", "measurable", "accountable", "experimentable" and most importantly "repeatable" and "constant".

At this moment, scientific equipment has not reached such ability to perform yet. So spirits and souls, for example, cannot be seen, thus, cannot be proven.

Maybe Buddhism is far ahead of time.

I think another reason why people are following Buddhism is the fact that teachings and behaviours of Buddhism are reasonable, logic and nothing(in it) claimed has been proven false or fake. This is most important. When people has problems following its Path and understanding one's problem, they can solve their problems. This is something people cannot learn in school or other religions.

Although not disproven, khamma, re birth, enlightenment & nirvana are only one possibility of what the ultimate truth might constitute.

Until proven such things can only be thought of as beliefs.

The proven aspects of Buddhism, such as mindfulness, meditation, right view & right speech are what makes Buddhism a noble philosophy.

The esoteric aspects mentioned above lead people to view Buddhism as a religion.

I don't know why people are turning to Buddhism.

I personally started with meditation and deep relaxation as a way of overcoming anxiety.

This exposed me to Buddhism and I seemed to have naturally progress.

The Buddha invited us to try it for ourselves.

In the absence of viable alternative I'm giving it a go.

Kamma as co-dependent origination is partially proven: Newton's mechanic, genetics, quanta physics, biologic evolution and others. The links above give more information from the foremost scholar of Thai-Theravada Buddhism.

[rockyysdt]

Kamma as co-dependent origination is partially proven: Newton's mechanic, genetics, quanta physics, biologic evolution and others. The links above give more information from the foremost scholar of Thai-Theravada Buddhism.

What is the link?

[healthcaretaker]

Some thoughts in general:

1. On a nation-by-nation basis, it appears that Buddhism is growing.

2. On a world-wide basis, I could find little data to support any very significant growth in Buddhism (the data I found indicated numbers of Buddhists worldwide to be "stable" or to have grown 1.9% or 2.1% on a 5 year basis, which could be real growth, or could be in the way the numbers were arrived at). For example, if you simply interview people in China, they might not be willing to admit their religious beliefs, therefore skewing the data.

3. One article suggested it was very difficult to compare numbers of Buddhists to numbers of some other religions, because some religions are more congregational than others, Buddhism being one of the least congregational.

4. I am wary of the numbers game because I'm not clear what people espousing such numbers are trying to gain. Religious competition? Hopefully not, because if that's the game, the fastest growing religion appears to be Islam at a growth rate of around 22%. Besides which, I don't see why spirituality has to be a contest. And, what does saying you are Buddhist (or any other religion) actually mean? All of my Thai friends say they are Buddhist, yet only a small percentage of them ever go to a Buddhist temple unless someone has died. Many have little real knowledge of Buddhist history or true Buddhist principles.

5. The OP continues to persist that science has proven Buddhism. I suggest he do a Google search of "scientific proof for buddhism" and see if there is any widespread belief of that. Instead, what he will find is constant arguing and bickering on the topic.

Thanks to Rocky for another wise discourse.

camerata & EVERYONE else,

Please take note of the above post. This is a very good example of an anti-Buddhist out to disturb a Buddhism forum(I will start another thread later to discuss why Buddhists are not as aggressive as other religions in recruiting followers and also don't "disturb" other religious follwers).

This is my experience - anti-Buddhist christians always mislead or misquote other s- for instance, the above poster mentioned:

1) that I "persist that science has proven Buddhism" - which i never did. I only persisted that science has NEVER proven any Buddhism belief as fake or false(yet).

2) suggesting lme to google "scientific proof for Buddhism" - further showed that this poster has intentions to create "misunderstandings" against me from others.

Now, given anyone else, one can dismiss my complaint by saying my reactions as "oversensitive" or a misunderstanding or that the above poster is not intentional BUT read this poster's other messages. He or she is NOT someone who could make such mistakes. It's clear intentional to create misunderstandings against me and my messages.

Now, moderators(camerata in particular) I leave it to you to do your job. Let's see if you are fair to me. Earlier elsewhere, you deleted part of my message against this (same) person and consider them as "provocative". Whay you think of my complaint here ?

Note: I hope moderators don't ban the above poster or delete his/her post. I hope it will be left there for all to see. One "christiaan" has already left us when he/she can answer me no more after I "exposed" him/her. Let's see this one.

[healthcaretaker]

Kamma as co-dependent origination is partially proven: Newton's mechanic, genetics, quanta physics, biologic evolution and others. The links above give more information from the foremost scholar of Thai-Theravada Buddhism.

What is the link?

I think lungmi is refering to post #6. I have no time to check it yet. Can you please do so ?

[healthcaretaker]

I've looked into the numbers a couple of times and couldn't find anything meaningful about the growth of Buddhism. Of the two very populous nations that previously had a lot of Buddhists, it's impossible to get sensible figures for Japan, whereas in China many people are rediscovering Buddhism now they are allowed to.

I checked into the oft-repeated claim that Buddhism is "the fastest growing religion in Australia" and found figures that proved the reason was immigration from Asia rather than conversion from other beliefs.

If anything, there is a fresh interest in Buddhism among mostly educated Westerners as a reaction to the extreme materialism of the West, but I doubt it adds up to significant growth worldwide.

You mentioned among "educated Westerners". It explained all. With more and more scientific findings and new discoveries found against their "original" religion, it's no surprise that "educated" people are more interested to "leave" wrongly-believed religions. So where they go ? Buddhism obviously since it's most logic, sensible and not found to be wrong by science. These people obviously canot go to islam since islam and christianity share same beliefs and "atitude" and also claimed to be ancestor or higher level than christianity.

As for figures and statistics, you will not find them. It's a very sensitve thing. Imagine the whole western society and everyone involved in christianity, right up to the top(Pope ?) will be affected.

But one can easily observe .........

1) More and more white people are attending Buddhist temples not as tourists but making stay and take short term courses. I have seen them in Lumbini and Bodhgaya. I also asked the locals around there and they confirm that there are much more westerners visitors and students recently.

2) The popularity of the Dalai Lama from his numbers of increasing western audience and books published.

3) Most Buddhists don't claim themselves to be Buddhists, especially those who converted. To many, Buddhism is a way of life, not a "belief" anymore. Just like I don't need to tell others that I am a human. Many people ignorant to Buddhism think that a Buddhist must go to temple or attend Buddhism classes. They are very wrong.(yes, I am refering to a recent poster too)

4) Buddhism is a "humble" and "soft-hearted" non-aggresive religion. They don't "declare". Remember how the Thai government react to the Japanese attack ? They also don't behave like other religions who send people out to others' countries to recruit the "simple-minded" people from the street. They don't do unreasonable "shoutings" few times a day without considering others;

There are more evidence but I will leave that to other better posters.

Edited December 23, 2010 by healthcaretaker

[camerata]

camerata & EVERYONE else,

Please take note of the above post. This is a very good example of an anti-Buddhist out to disturb a Buddhism forum

You're overly paranoid, healthcaretaker. All he did was point out that the statistics don't appear to support what you said. It's up to you to prove that they do. This is just normal debate in a forum.

Now, moderators(camerata in particular) I leave it to you to do your job. Let's see if you are fair to me. Earlier elsewhere, you deleted part of my message against this (same) person and consider them as "provocative". Whay you think of my complaint here ?

Healthcaretaker, DO NOT discuss moderation in the forums (check the rules about this), and leave the moderating to the moderators. We are all here to discuss Buddhism, not to attack other posters, bait them or "expose" them. If you don't like what someone says, by all means rebut their arguments but keep the personal remarks to yourself. You have the option to ignore them too.

Some posters are very critical of institutional or traditional Buddhism, but that doesn't mean they are out to destroy it. So calm down a bit, OK?

[camerata]

You mentioned among "educated Westerners". It explained all. With more and more scientific findings and new discoveries found against their "original" religion, it's no surprise that "educated" people are more interested to "leave" wrongly-believed religions. So where they go ? Buddhism obviously since it's most logic, sensible and not found to be wrong by science.

I'm sure lots of them become atheists or secular humanists. Not everyone wants to exchange one religion for another. If they do, though, Buddhism - the core teachings - is probably the least religious religion and the one most in accord with modern psychology.

[lungmi]

You mentioned among "educated Westerners". It explained all. With more and more scientific findings and new discoveries found against their "original" religion, it's no surprise that "educated" people are more interested to "leave" wrongly-believed religions. So where they go ? Buddhism obviously since it's most logic, sensible and not found to be wrong by science.

I'm sure lots of them become atheists or secular humanists. Not everyone wants to exchange one religion for another. If they do, though, Buddhism - the core teachings - is probably the least religious religion and the one most in accord with modern psychology.

Atheism can be a religion too: I attach myself to the market, to consumerism, to the stock exchange.

For Thai society you already have the mixture of western and "buddhist" consumerism;

http://www.visalo.org/englishArticles/reThinkingKarma.htm

http://www.mysticsaint.info/2007/04/spiritual-materialism-and-sacraments-of.html

[rockyysdt]

Kamma as co-dependent origination is partially proven: Newton's mechanic, genetics, quanta physics, biologic evolution and others. The links above give more information from the foremost scholar of Thai-Theravada Buddhism.

Hi L.

One of the links refers to faith, which l use until personal experience kicks in, but which is the partial proof you refer to?

Can you link to the specific passage or section which proves khamma is partially proven?

[lungmi]

Kamma as co-dependent origination is partially proven: Newton's mechanic, genetics, quanta physics, biologic evolution and others. The links above give more information from the foremost scholar of Thai-Theravada Buddhism.

Hi L.

One of the links refers to faith, which l use until personal experience kicks in, but which is the partial proof you refer to?

Can you link to the specific passage or section which proves khamma is partially proven?

Newton: An apple fells down. The dhammic law of gravity.

Psychology: I insult you and you get angry.

The kamma of "rebirth in next life" is not proven, but it's Cultural Buddhism, not Authentic Buddhism. Tan Buddhadhasa rejected this idea saying: You want to kill? You will be reborn as murder in this life.

Tan Dhammapitaka (P.A.. Payutto) not rejects it, but says, this is an irrelevant metaphysical speculation. No one knows.

Study the links. Not easy to understand. The "Buddhadhamma" of Payutto is part of the top 100 books of Thai culture (Shakespeare, Moliere, Goethe say hello), This why only academics read it and some monks.

Edited December 24, 2010 by lungmi

[lungmi]

I forget this link:

You have all what you want about the topic.

http://www.buddhanet.net/cmdsg/science.htm

[rockyysdt]

I forget this link:

You have all what you want about the topic.

http://www.buddhanet...dsg/science.htm

This is what I could find on khamma from your link.

A man with tears in his eyes may be suffering from the effects of smoke (physical law), or from extremely happy or sad emotional states (psychic law), or he may be suffering anxiety over past deeds (law of kamma). A headache might be caused by illness (biological law), a stuffy or overheated room (physical law) or it could be from depression and worry (law of kamma).

Certain deeds may result in anxiety for some but without a second thought from others.

One may be genetically inclined towards depression and worry, but where is the proof that this is due to the fruits of khamma vs random misfortune to inherit such traits.

Where is partial proof of khamma?

[phetaroi]

Newton: An apple fells down. The dhammic law of gravity.

Psychology: I insult you and you get angry.

The kamma of "rebirth in next life" is not proven, but it's Cultural Buddhism, not Authentic Buddhism. Tan Buddhadhasa rejected this idea saying: You want to kill? You will be reborn as murder in this life.

Tan Dhammapitaka (P.A.. Payutto) not rejects it, but says, this is an irrelevant metaphysical speculation. No one knows.

Study the links. Not easy to understand. The "Buddhadhamma" of Payutto is part of the top 100 books of Thai culture (Shakespeare, Moliere, Goethe say hello), This why only academics read it and some monks.

The physical world and the psychological world are not comparable. Yes, an apple falls down due to the law of gravity. It won't fall up, it won't fall sideways (unless there is a wind). That's a physical law.

Your psychological example is a false premise. You insult me and I may get angry, or I may just laugh at you, or I may ignore you, or perhaps I just don't give a fig.

So the logical question is, is kamma an uncontrollable reaction, or a psychological reaction (at least in some instances). And, if it is an uncontrollable reaction, what power makes it happen.

[lungmi]

Her you see the law of codependent-origination (Kamma) on the psychological level. False premise?

'He insulted me, hit me, beat me, robbed me' — for those who brood on this, hostility isn't stilled.

'He insulted me, hit me, beat me, robbed me' — for those who don't brood on this, hostility is stilled.

Hostilities aren't stilled through hostility, regardless.

Hostilities are stilled through non-hostility: this, an unending truth.

Unlike those who don't realize that we're here on the verge of perishing,

those who do: their quarrels are stilled.

(Dhammapada)

[phetaroi]

Her you see the law of codependent-origination (Kamma) on the psychological level. False premise?

'He insulted me, hit me, beat me, robbed me' — for those who brood on this, hostility isn't stilled.

'He insulted me, hit me, beat me, robbed me' — for those who don't brood on this, hostility is stilled.

Hostilities aren't stilled through hostility, regardless.

Hostilities are stilled through non-hostility: this, an unending truth.

Unlike those who don't realize that we're here on the verge of perishing,

those who do: their quarrels are stilled.

(Dhammapada)

My point is that in true a science, an experiment can be conducted any number of times, and the result will be the same. In you example, however, as I pointed out, there could be several different outcomes.

[lungmi]

Her you see the law of codependent-origination (Kamma) on the psychological level. False premise?

'He insulted me, hit me, beat me, robbed me' — for those who brood on this, hostility isn't stilled.

'He insulted me, hit me, beat me, robbed me' — for those who don't brood on this, hostility is stilled.

Hostilities aren't stilled through hostility, regardless.

Hostilities are stilled through non-hostility: this, an unending truth.

Unlike those who don't realize that we're here on the verge of perishing,

those who do: their quarrels are stilled.

(Dhammapada)

My point is that in true a science, an experiment can be conducted any number of times, and the result will be the same. In you example, however, as I pointed out, there could be several different outcomes.

Modern theory of cognition shows higher complexity than your point of view. (Quantum physics, Heisenbergsche uncertainty relation, fuzzy logic, corpuscle/wave dilemma of the light.)

"The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs, it would be Buddhism."

(May 19th, 1939, Albert Einstein's speech on "Science and Religion" in Princeton, New Jersey, U.S.A.)"

The work of P.A. Payutto goes in the same direction. Study the links above..

Edited December 25, 2010 by lungmi

[phetaroi]

Her you see the law of codependent-origination (Kamma) on the psychological level. False premise?

'He insulted me, hit me, beat me, robbed me' — for those who brood on this, hostility isn't stilled.

'He insulted me, hit me, beat me, robbed me' — for those who don't brood on this, hostility is stilled.

Hostilities aren't stilled through hostility, regardless.

Hostilities are stilled through non-hostility: this, an unending truth.

Unlike those who don't realize that we're here on the verge of perishing,

those who do: their quarrels are stilled.

(Dhammapada)

My point is that in true a science, an experiment can be conducted any number of times, and the result will be the same. In you example, however, as I pointed out, there could be several different outcomes.

Modern theory of cognition shows higher complexity than your point of view. (Quantum physics, Heisenbergsche uncertainty relation, fuzzy logic, corpuscle/wave dilemma of the light.)

"The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs, it would be Buddhism."

(May 19th, 1939, Albert Einstein's speech on "Science and Religion" in Princeton, New Jersey, U.S.A.)"

The work of P.A. Payutto goes in the same direction. Study the links above..

Let's not fawn all over the quote just because it's from Einstein. Einstein has stated his personal opinion of what should be. And, he uses a very important word in there -- "if".

[dutchguest]

Science is mainly concerned with objects, with the outerworld. There is an essential dualism between the subject, the scientist and the object, which makes science identifiable and verifiable for others so that things can be proven objectivly.

Religion is in essence a subjectiv experience, just like love or the experience of beauty or the experience of enlightenment. You can try to conceptualise the experience, explain it in words, but there is nothing to "prove" or "disprove". Others can only believe or not what you say. Idem dito I think rebirth and karma are subjectiv experiences. Asking for proves is asking the impossible.

[camerata]

The Einstein quote, popular though it may be, is probably spurious. It's never been proven to exist and there are two versions of it. See Tricycle and other blogs/discussions about this.

[camerata]

One of the best books I've seen (flipped through, not read) on Buddhism and science is the Dalai Lama's The Universe in a Single Atom. As one review put it, "Sometimes the Dalai Lama discovers similarities between the two fields."