Thoughts on buddhism and hinduism?

Author: Sir.Lancelot
Religion
spirituality

Posts

Total: 34
Topic's author
#1
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 186
Posts: 874
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
In your opinion, are The Four Noble Truths and The Eightfold Path a practical way of living or are these an unrealistic lifestyle?
Whether you are christian or muslim. Do you see the three main gods: Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva as nonexistent or demonic apostasies? (Evil beings posing as gods.)

Does the buddhist explanation of existence being cyclic versus a single creation make any sense? And that we are all trapped in a state of samsara, until we break the cycle and achieve nirvana?
Please share your thoughts. Hold back no criticisms.
Nietzsche did say buddhism is maturer than christianity, but this is just one point of view. I'm more interested in what the rest of DART has to say on the subject.
#2
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
Demons cannot materialise like that, that is a protestant conspiracy theory heresy.

Demons and Satan can manipulate humans however, to see and experience fake deities.

I will tell you a secret about Buddhism; it is all discipline and 0 heart. The problem with it is it leads to heartless disciplined life. This is why Rohingya genocide and the way Sinhalese abused Tamils for a long time in Sri Lanka occur. Look at Thailand, ladyboys all over (not a slur, they identify as something between trans and crossdresser, as in they know and accept they are male but are ladies at the same time and often work as 'escorts'). Thai boxing aka Muay Thai is onr of the most horrific combat sports ever invented, the training leads to severe long term nerve damage and arthritis, the fighting and the injuries are super extreme. Buddhism is far from ideal. Do not adhere to it.

Hinduism is okay. Okay is all it is. It is an ethnoreligion like Judaism really but unlike Judaism does not see those born into it as necessarily elites. If you think it is to far from Judaism, notice both are extremly ancient and Hinduism ended up justifying India's caste system among other things. The problem is even the Vedas are only upheld as sacrosanct by Vishnu adherents (most do not realise this). Shiva sect(s) and other minidenominations outside those 2 do not think the Vedas are sacrosanct. This means I am telling you around 56% of Hindus are unsure what even counts as true Hindu scripture. There is other stuff than Vedas most don't know about. It is all vague what the real Hinduism is and all they agree on is Brahman, a god-essence with 0 morals or agenda, is behind it all. It is deism with a bunch of demigods masking it. End of discussion.

Here is the real issue.

If they are correct, your only penalty would be being reincarnated as an ant or severely disfigured and poor person. Then you get a next life anyway where you get rewarded for being treated so badly and enduring it or get punished for how poorly you endured it. That means if they are correct, you never ever should root for.them over Christianity or Islam for instance, since there is no judgement day in  Buddhism and Hinduism and your future self would maybe end up scoring well enough dharmically or karmically to wind up in shambala/nirvana whatever.
#3
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
Please ask a mod to move this to Religion subforum.
#4
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,316
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Old style, Asian based creation and existence hypotheses, that developed into theo-political systems of people management and social culture.

Basically no different to to the development of the Mangod hypotheses that developed and spread from the Middle East, through Europe and beyond.

Still no nearer to knowing the truth of creation and existence though.


Who has the best book, provides the best entertainment and has the most lavish costumery, is just pretentious nonsense.

RC's are good at pretentious nonsense, Hindus like to occasionally hurl brightly coloured powder at each other and Buddhists like to go Ommmmmmmmmm.

Whatever is takes to float ones boat, I suppose.
#5
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,386
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Old style, Asian based creation and existence hypotheses, that developed into theo-political systems of people management and social culture.

Most ancient Asian spiritual/philosophy is to go with the flow. 
The flow of the ocean or river current, the flow of the wind etc. 
The path of least resistance aka Gravity.

To go against the flow, was a to go against God { the higher power of our environmental nature { thunder storms, volcanoes, tornadoes, earthquakes etc }

Basically no different to to the development of the Mangod hypotheses that developed and spread from the Middle East, through Europe and beyond.
No differrent, in-so-far-as, God { patriarchal } God has a plan { deterministic } for humans and the environment they live within.
However, in both { or all } cases, humans, for the most part, attempt to rule over nature in order, to maintain some orders that aids them in maintaining, and/or raising their standard of living.

Humans find away around the all powerful God{ nature } ---to go against God-- in order to meet their immediate needs.

Biological need over faith/belief is often the stronger impedius of direction forward for humans

Still no nearer to knowing the truth of creation and existence though.
Knowledge is gained from experience, and that knowledge is often times passed on to the next generation, who then gain more knowledge and with that comes more abilities to manipulate the environmental resources for higher standard of living.

Who has the best book, provides the best entertainment and has the most lavish costumery, is just pretentious nonsense.
Humans do like color. A rainbow has many colors. A costume is way of drawing attention to self.  Some sihks seek money from tourists via their costumes.

Hollywood and bollywood does the same, except with less fanfare as a holy path to get closer to God, and rather as a pathway to their beliefs, desires etc.

RC's are good at pretentious nonsense, Hindus like to occasionally hurl brightly coloured powder at each other and Buddhists like to go Ommmmmmmmmm.
Om is said to be the sound of the Universe.

Here is link to utube with five sounds found in Universe. There called sonifications of EMRadiation { for most of them }or Gravity waves.

Again this the accumulation of knowledge from humans advancing technologies and desire to gain knowledge about their environment.

Whatever is takes to float ones boat, I suppose
Whatever it takes to crank one's tractor. :--))

Whatever it takes to get to the moon.

Buzz Light Year....' to infinity and beyond '.....of course there is no beyond infinite this that or the other.

Humans can, and do,  make statements, that, make no logical, common sense critical thinking pathways of thought. Its allowed

#6
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,112
3
4
6
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
6
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
The truth of suffering (Dukkha)
I agree with this one, obviously.

The truth of the origin of suffering (Samudāya)
This one is obvious as well.

The truth of the cessation of suffering (Nirodha)
With this one, I would disagree. You can greatly reduce your suffering with religion or magic. In fact, there are latin words to remove all upset or pain. But stopping all suffering might not be possible. I dont think person ever reaches a state where he is totally okay with everything that happens. Might not even be very desirable to reach that state.

The truth of the path to the cessation of suffering (Magga)
Obviously, I personally disagree with the path buddhism takes. This is not to say that buddhism has a bad path. Its just personally not for me. I couldnt ever see myself do all what buddhists do.
#7
TheGreatSunGod
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 1,112
3
4
6
TheGreatSunGod's avatar
TheGreatSunGod
3
4
6
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
The Eightfold Path a practical way of living
It greatly depends on what "right words, right thoughts, right actions..." are. I agree that there are right words, obviously. But my idea of them is different from buddhist idea. Also, my understanding of Dharma is very different from buddhism and hinduism. I agree that actions have consequences, and that there are actually objective moral laws in universe. What I disagree with is them being constant. Yes, actions have consequences. However, same action can have different consequences based on conditions. In this sense, not everyone gets rewarded and punished equally for exact same action. The idea is completely absurd. The consequences of actions depend on conditions in which it happens. In this sense, I trust in Gods more than I trust in instructions made by humans. I seek wisdom from Gods, not from humans. That is the draconian path. Wisdom which comes from Gods is much better.
#8
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Hindus invented the Ommmm, not Buddhists.
#9
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,316
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I only suggested that Buddhists like to go Ommmmm.

I had no idea who went Ommmm first.

Same with Mangod...Who invented the first Mangod?


#10
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,316
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Thanks for that appraisal.
#11
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Explain mangod's full meaning because ironically it may be Hindus.
#12
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 13,316
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
I couldnt ever see myself do all what Buddhists do.

Nope, kung-fu would be a bit too strenuous.
Topic's author
#13
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 186
Posts: 874
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I like your analysis. 

I’m currently looking into buddhism and hinduism to see what they’re about. I read about a lot of controversial figures who proclaimed to be buddhist, but were condemned by the community because their path diverged. 

FishChaser made very great arguments when he described it as a nihilistic and godless version of hinduism
#14
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,771
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
Most Asians are budhists and they seem to be OK. They are not heartless as some people say. It's just that they can control their emotions better than Westerners do, and they are more successful because they live under the budhist principles.

Buddhism is more about a life style, not a religion. There are people that worship Budha as a God as much as you can see Christians worshipping Jesus. I will never understand this strange behavior of worshipping a man of flesh and blood but it seems people do it out of necessity so I'm not going to judge.

If I were you I wouldn't choose a specific religion or phylosophy but I would pick some things of each one that suits best for my life. In my case, I read a lot of budhism and taoism, and in general books that address spirituality (which is basically mindfulness) in a sensical way. 
#15
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
-->
@IlDiavolo
Almost your entire post was false. It is a minority religion in Asia if we contrast it to Asia's pioulation.

Buddha is the title of anyone that made it to Nirvana.
#16
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
I dont want to discuss him, nor if he got it partly from me or not.

I will say it is wrong to say:

Buddhism is a nihilistic and godless version of hinduism
If anything the nihilistic one is Hinduism.

Both of them actually have no true God. They have a God essence that in Buddhism idk if it even has a name at all for it. In Hinduism its name is Brahman.

Buddhism realised 2 major flaws in Hinduism. Firstly, all the demigods in it must be false deities even for Hindus and would be not really above us at all.

Buddhism sees a second flaw that Atman (our self identity not just 'soul') which is a Hindu term, has to actually be in oneness with Brahman in Hindu logic.

This means everything is fake to Hindus but they deny it. Buddhists admit it. That makes Buddhists seem more nihilistic and godless but they actually made open and bkunt the fact that Hinduism is masks monotheism yet that its true deity is a personalityless agebdaless God essence named Brahman that takes the form of everything and 'plays roleplay with itself' really.

Buddhism was basically hyperhonest Hinduism but then it began to add things. For instance Hindus said we can be reincarnated as more often humans usually, Buddhiste altered other things such as the mechanics of what they renamed as Nirvana.

Buddhists also changed to rebirth from reincarnation.
#17
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 1,358
3
3
9
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
3
9
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Buddhism is a philosophy that westerners misinterpreted as a religion. It's really more akin to stoicism, or another Hellenistic school of greek philosophy. 

Frankly though, it misses some things as a philosophy too. While it's correct that suffering stems from desire, it forgets that happiness also stems from desire. Desire fulfilled is happiness, desire not realized is suffering. If you take out desire completely, you aren't left with peace or nirvana, you're just left with nothing. It's like swallowing some dynamite to cure cancer. Sure it works, but you kinda missed the point. 

As for Hinduism, it's the same as all other major religions. It's a cool story, but is there any evidence?
#18
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
-->
@Moozer325
Buddhism is a religion. It even has 3 sects.
#19
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 1,358
3
3
9
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
3
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Call it what you like, but by my definition it's definitely a philosophy. For me, religions need a belief in the supernatural. Buddhism doesn't have that. It's atheistic and is solely about what we humans should do with our lives on earth.
#20
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
-->
@Moozer325
Yes they do. They argue God is roleplaying as all of us. Or at least 1 sect says so. That is also its primary kritik of Hinduism. In Hinduism it has demigods but the real God Brahman is the essence of all, even us.
#21
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 1,358
3
3
9
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
3
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Okay, one sect does, but the fundamental teachings of the religion as a whole is pretty atheistic.

#22
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
-->
@Moozer325
It is a religion. It is arguably deistic but is a firm religion. Your issue is it being between deism and theism.
#23
Moozer325
Moozer325's avatar
Debates: 33
Posts: 1,358
3
3
9
Moozer325's avatar
Moozer325
3
3
9
-->
@AdaptableRatman
I guess we just have different definitions of religion then
Topic's author
#24
Sir.Lancelot
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Debates: 186
Posts: 874
4
6
9
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
4
6
9
-->
@Moozer325
Buddhism is a philosophy that westerners misinterpreted as a religion. It's really more akin to stoicism, or another Hellenistic school of greek philosophy. 
Yes, I already know this and I agree.

It is categorized as a religion, but I would be wrong to try and deny that you are right on a technicality.
Semantically, religion is defined as the organized or formal worship of a god or group of gods/goddess. Which means that semantically, buddhism is technically not a religion.

Since the terminology is a little broad and this causes a bit of a grey line when discussing definitions, I would prefer that lexicographers and linguists open a third category and call buddhism a spirituality. Traditional buddhist beliefs have specific views on the supernatural. While most variations of buddhism are godless, the sects that do believe in gods/goddesses do not have any supreme gods/goddesses. 
What should define the distinction between spirituality and philosophy is whether it has anything divine or supernatural.
Since stoics do not recognize or acknowledge anything divine like reincarnation or karma, but buddhists do. Buddhism should just be classified as a spirituality. 

LeVayan Satanism and Wicca should also be considered spiritualities, since they are religions without gods/goddesses.

Frankly though, it misses some things as a philosophy too. While it's correct that suffering stems from desire, it forgets that happiness also stems from desire. Desire fulfilled is happiness, desire not realized is suffering. If you take out desire completely, you aren't left with peace or nirvana, you're just left with nothing. It's like swallowing some dynamite to cure cancer. Sure it works, but you kinda missed the point. 
Happiness does not stem from desire, you may have a point that happiness stems from pleasure.

If you remove desire from the equation, you are not left with nothing. That is to confuse lack of desire with apathy. Lack of desire leads to nonchalance, and neutrality. Neither of which are the same as apathy. A lack of desire leads to spiritual and emotional fulfillment.
Desire is a double-edged sword which perpetuates suffering at the expense of chasing an emotional high that makes you dependent on pleasure.
#25
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 11
Posts: 3,662
4
5
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
5
10
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
@Moozer325
I know very little about Buddhism and Hinduism, and don't have strong opinions on them.
If I was to take an earnest interest in either, I'd probably check out some books from the public library, though people online 'can be an interesting source as well, I think books tend to be deeper and broader.
Sure Wikipedia can give you an 'outline of something, but it's shallow.

I 'think but don't know that some forms of Buddhism have a belief in the supernatural.
Big religion, been around a while, lots of splinter groups.

I also think that some forms of Buddhism have no belief in the supernatural.
But I 'think such is more common of Westernized Buddhism, as utilized to the purposes and vision of the westerners who interpreted it by their own ideas,
Not that certain forms of Eastern Buddhism 'can't lack the supernatural.
. . .

Some forms of Judaism I'd argue one could see as Atheistic,
Or some versions of whatever one calls the worship of the Greek or Roman gods, given that nobles were sometimes rather cynical about the Gods, yet might have appreciated what they 'represented or were aware that the 'commoners were devout in their belief, so best to be in charge and in practice of said ceremonies and worship.
. . .

Course, as I said, I'm incredibly lacking knowledge of Buddhism,
But at just at a glance online, 'looks to me like 'some people believe in literal Buddhist Hells Heavens Gods Spirits and such,
Though I think many others might see them as metaphors or mortals, states of being.
Big umbrella.
#26
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,667
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
While Buddhism's emphasis on reason and direct experience makes it a unique and compelling spiritual path, declaring it the "most rational" human religion is subjective and depends on individual interpretations of rationality.
Buddhism does offer a framework for understanding suffering, ethics, and the nature of reality that can be explored through reason and direct experience, but other religious and philosophical systems also present rational arguments and practical applications.
 




#27
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
Therevada Buddhists do not even need to be vegetarian, this is because it is not actually rooted in ahimsa which Therevada do uphold.

A lot of Buddhism is just severely honest, blunt watered down Hinduism. It removes all the masking. The problem is the masming actually mattered for morals to actually seem to matter.
#28
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,667
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
Therevada Buddhists do not even need to be vegetarian, this is because it is not actually rooted in ahimsa which Therevada do uphold.

A lot of Buddhism is just severely honest, blunt watered down Hinduism. It removes all the masking. The problem is the masming actually mattered for morals to actually seem to matter.
Yes, Buddhism is widely considered to have started as a reform religion or movement, arising within a broader context of religious and philosophical ferment in ancient India.
 
It challenged established Vedic practices and offered a new path to spiritual liberation, particularly focusing on the "Middle Way" between extreme asceticism and worldly indulgence.
 




#29
IlDiavolo
IlDiavolo's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,771
3
2
5
IlDiavolo's avatar
IlDiavolo
3
2
5
-->
@AdaptableRatman
Almost your entire post was false. It is a minority religion in Asia if we contrast it to Asia's pioulation.
Yes, you're right. I meant to say the most developed Asian countries are budhist. The shithole countries are muslims or hindus.

Buddha is the title of anyone that made it to Nirvana.
Buddha is the guy whose teachings were taken to create Buddhism. 
#30
AdaptableRatman
AdaptableRatman's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 453
1
3
6
AdaptableRatman's avatar
AdaptableRatman
1
3
6
-->
@IlDiavolo
Yes, you're right. I meant to say the most developed Asian countries are budhist. The shithole countries are muslims or hindus.
Without searching more, rank the nations of Asia that come to mind. Then I will show you the Buddhist percentage Pop. and government official religion too of your top 3 and bottom 3.