Imagine that you are stranded on a desert highway and the nearest town is 1000 miles away. Also imagine that everyonce and a while a car passes on the road and you hitchhike. None of the drivers care and stop to pick you up. After a while, you drop your thumb and attempt to make it to the town on foot. I relate this to Buddhism because cars are like religions of this world that will truely not drive you to where you need to be. Buddhism is getting tired of worldly religions and seeking the path on your own. You give up because no religions provide true concrete results. Instead you decide to walk the path on your own and forget about waiting for someone to pick you up.
2006-11-14 20:06:29 · 11 answers · asked by Ramond 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Interesting, but flawed reasoning.
Religions don't "pick people." People are indoctrinated into religions by other people... usually parents, and usually before they've developed the thinking skills to examine the religions critically so they can decide if they make sense or not.
Buddhism is a religious philosophy that offers some genuine, good advice on living, but where it fails (as do all religions) is in its inability to adapt to the progress of modern society. Ancient religions and philosophies all suffer from this same restriction... they are mired in the thinking of their day.
Buddhism saw/sees the world as a place of lack. A place where suffering must be endured and accepted in order to find peace. This is not surprising because suffering was especially prevalent in the time of Buddha. But today we know that people need not suffer. The world is a place of plenty. Hardship can be overcome, both individually, and collectively, if people want it badly enough.
So long as the individual defers to the collective, they can only experience the strength of the collective, which is always limited. True strength omes not from rigidity, but from flexibility. True strength comes from within each person. The Buddhist surrendering to fate to find peace is no different than the Christian who surrenders to Christ to find love. They are both delusions.
Live is a human matter, and the only thing that affects ones life is paying attention to the matters of day-to-day living.
All the rest is spiritual mumbo-jumbo and bunk.
2006-11-14 20:09:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It seems awfully wordy. It might be better if you don't try thinking of Buddhism in terms of religion but in terms of mental health. Those cars driving past are not only not going in the same direction but they are not even on the path you are walking on. you are thinking of your path as a road that others can travel but they can not. Your path is made for you by your feet alone, and every step is sacred. It is not the destination that matters as much as the journey.
the evangelist paste job on how to convert Buddhists to Christians just shows why it does not work. The closest you get is a mixed up mess that is represented by Vietnamese Pure land Buddhism or the Japanese Amida Buddhism. They basically use Christianity to convert Christians into Buddhists.
printninja hits upon the essential lesson of the purer forms of Buddhism in this line of his "Live is a human matter, and the only thing that affects ones life is paying attention to the matters of day-to-day living." That brief statement captures almost everything that Gautama wanted to teach, awareness is the key.
2006-11-15 04:18:19 · answer #2 · answered by Barabas 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that, if a Christian viewed Buddhism with an open mind, they'd see that the two are not incompatible. Buddhism has, in the non-religious view, another way of viewing life, and thinking, it's core tenets are non-religious, and has self-improvement as one of it's goals.
The problem seems to be that, since Buddhists don't think like a medieval surf, slaving under the orders of the Church, the Christians view it with hostility, and immediately claim it must be of the Devil...A world view, sadly, which burnt many a heretic alive...
Hail Eris! All Hail Discordia!
2006-11-15 04:24:04 · answer #3 · answered by Hatir Ba Loon 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That analogy could be better used on the original Taoism. It states that people should to reflective on their actions, learning the truth as it is being shown around them. As I have answered in other questions, Lao Zi stated that the true path cannot be taught or shown. What is real and holy to one may not apply to the others. Others can never truly guide you to the path most suitable for you
2006-11-15 04:47:34 · answer #4 · answered by Dumbguy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I love the analogy but it could be referring to anyone's own personal path, not strictly Buddhism.
Blessed Be
2006-11-15 04:11:52 · answer #5 · answered by Celestian Vega 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Interesting.
But Bhuddism is its own religion. It's the equivilant of a taxi cab telling you to walk.
2006-11-15 04:10:18 · answer #6 · answered by bowlingcap 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There were some real good responses to your analogy, and one really long [response] ,
I like what the Witch said!
Blessed Be!
2006-11-15 04:26:49 · answer #7 · answered by Sheila 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I like the analogy.
Would you agree though that the world's problems(and religous problems) all derive from sinful nature.
2006-11-15 04:18:09 · answer #8 · answered by wondering? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, I hear what your saying. But it's also good to hitch a ride, sometimes, so that you can understand and love your religious friends as THEY are.
2006-11-15 18:54:03 · answer #9 · answered by Teaim 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And that's what led me down this path myself.
2006-11-15 04:14:22 · answer #10 · answered by lerxstwannabe 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋