Buddha vs charles darwin

[Hyaenidae]

What doesnt make it true?buddhism?

Nope 4k year lifespan

 

[greenthunder]

ඇයි පොලව ගෝලාකාරයි කියන එක ඒකත් නාසා එකෙන් ගහපු අමු බොරුවක් නෙ

Freaking Flatearthers.

 

[Randir]

wiki eke tiyena okkoma atta nevei
tawa parallel universe tiyenna puluwan
kalpayak kiyanne awurudu billion ganak novenna puluwan

 

[Emios]

Nope 4k year lifespan

Why maitree buddha is to arive when life expentancy is 80000 years and currently in thusitha loka.So eveything written is seems fake,

 

[Emios]

If looking like that even constrcution of ruwanweliseya seems fake,It is wriiten that buddha himself predicted construction of it.And it was one his last 5 wishes.And relics jump into air and stuff.All seems fake.

 

[Hyaenidae]

Why maitree buddha is to arive when life expentancy is 80000 years and currently in thusitha loka.So eveything written is seems fake,

If looking like that even constrcution of ruwanweliseya seems fake,It is wriiten that buddha himself predicted construction of it.And it was one his last 5 wishes.And relics jump into air and stuff.All seems fake.

Don't be ridiculous; Buddha predicting the construction of the R-seya has nothing to do with the moral base/moral conduct of the Buddhism

Buddha predicting the construction of R-seya has nothing to do with being a Buddhist 'cause unlike other religions, one doesn't have to have faith in a supernatural power to be a Buddhist - hence, Buddha having or not having the supernatural power to see the future has nothing to do with being a Buddhist. It's simply irrelevant.

 

[Kolama]

Bumpation

 

[Emios]

Don't be ridiculous; Buddha predicting the construction of the R-seya has nothing to do with the moral base/moral conduct of the Buddhism

Buddha predicting the construction of R-seya has nothing to do with being a Buddhist 'cause unlike other religions, one doesn't have to have faith in a supernatural power to be a Buddhist - hence, Buddha having or not having the supernatural power to see the future has nothing to do with being a Buddhist. It's simply irrelevant.

Why it has nothing to do.It is also a written belief.If you believe it how you can reject written belief of life expentcy of previous buddhas and future one.

 

[greenthunder]

If looking like that even constrcution of ruwanweliseya seems fake,It is wriiten that buddha himself predicted construction of it.And it was one his last 5 wishes.And relics jump into air and stuff.All seems fake.

Could you pinpoint a Sutta (within Pali Canon) where Buddha supposedly did this prediction?

 

[Emios]

Could you pinpoint a Sutta (within Pali Canon) where Buddha supposedly did this prediction?

I don't know I have not read all of it.But it is what we learn from childhood.It is what all monks preach about ruwanweliseya.

 

[Hyaenidae]

Why it has nothing to do.It is also a written belief.If you believe it how you can reject written belief of life expentcy of previous buddhas and future one.

To the seekers of truth the Buddha says:

"Do not accept anything on (mere) hearsay -- (i.e., thinking that thus have we heard it for a long time). Do not accept anything by mere tradition -- (i.e., thinking that it has thus been handed down through many generations). Do not accept anything on account of mere rumors -- (i.e., by believing what others say without any investigation). Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures. Do not accept anything by mere suppositions. Do not accept anything by mere inference. Do not accept anything by merely considering the reasons. Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions. Do not accept anything merely because it seems acceptable -- (i.e., thinking that as the speaker seems to be a good person his words should be accepted). Do not accept anything thinking that the ascetic is respected by us (therefore it is right to accept his word).

"But when you know for yourselves -- these things are immoral, these things are blameworthy, these things are censured by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken conduce to ruin and sorrow -- then indeed do you reject them.

"When you know for yourselves -- these things are moral, these things are blameless, these things are praised by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken, conduce to well-being and happiness -- then do you live acting accordingly."

http://www.buddhanet.net/nutshell03.htm

 

[greenthunder]

I don't know I have not read all of it.But it is what we learn from childhood.It is what all monks preach about ruwanweliseya.

That is a broad generalization. Buddhist literature attracted Vedic and Brahmanic mysticism after Buddhas parinirvana. What you claimed is not recorded in Suttas but a book called Thupavamsa, or maybe its Mahavamsa, I too am not sure. But I know its not recorded in Pali canon.


Its the general consensus among Buddhist (scholars and others alike) that Theravada Tripitaka is the least adulterated collection of what Buddha preached. So if you are interested in legitimacy of Buddha or his teaching why not actually read HIS teaching? And figure it out by yourself.


If you are interested in that I could give some pointers but I sense you are not interested in that are you...If I am wrong say so and I will put forth my terms of engagement.

 

[Emios]

To the seekers of truth the Buddha says:

"Do not accept anything on (mere) hearsay -- (i.e., thinking that thus have we heard it for a long time). Do not accept anything by mere tradition -- (i.e., thinking that it has thus been handed down through many generations). Do not accept anything on account of mere rumors -- (i.e., by believing what others say without any investigation). Do not accept anything just because it accords with your scriptures. Do not accept anything by mere suppositions. Do not accept anything by mere inference. Do not accept anything by merely considering the reasons. Do not accept anything merely because it agrees with your pre-conceived notions. Do not accept anything merely because it seems acceptable -- (i.e., thinking that as the speaker seems to be a good person his words should be accepted). Do not accept anything thinking that the ascetic is respected by us (therefore it is right to accept his word).

"But when you know for yourselves -- these things are immoral, these things are blameworthy, these things are censured by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken conduce to ruin and sorrow -- then indeed do you reject them.

"When you know for yourselves -- these things are moral, these things are blameless, these things are praised by the wise, these things, when performed and undertaken, conduce to well-being and happiness -- then do you live acting accordingly."

http://www.buddhanet.net/nutshell03.htm

My Point is you believe the story of ruwanweliseya,but rejects life expentancy.

 

[Hyaenidae]

My Point is you believe the story of ruwanweliseya,but rejects life expentancy.

I don't believe either of them! Seriously, relics jumping around? How daft one could be to believe something like that?!

 

[Emios]

That is a broad generalization. Buddhist literature attracted Vedic and Brahmanic mysticism after Buddhas parinirvana. What you claimed is not recorded in Suttas but a book called Thupavamsa, or maybe its Mahavamsa, I too am not sure. But I know its not recorded in Pali canon.


Its the general consensus among Buddhist (scholars and others alike) that Theravada Tripitaka is the least adulterated collection of what Buddha preached. So if you are interested in legitimacy of Buddha or his teaching why not actually read HIS teaching? And figure it out by yourself.


If you are interested in that I could give some pointers but I sense you are not interested in that are you...If I am wrong say so and I will put forth my terms of engagement.

Why you think i'm not interested.pls do so.I open this thread not to declare i knew everything.But to discuss.

 

[Emios]

I don't believe either of them! Seriously, relics jumping around? How daft one could be to believe something like that?!

I thought you believe it

 

[Harvard-Bio]

Its the general consensus among Buddhist (scholars and others alike) that Theravada Tripitaka is the least adulterated collection of what Buddha preached. So if you are interested in legitimacy of Buddha or his teaching why not actually read HIS teaching? And figure it out by yourself.

Before you utter another word, may I remind you, that some people have found a modern Buddha, who seem to act as a radical, even to the extent that doubt the legitimacy and authenticity of Dantha Dathu.

 

[Emios]

Before you utter another word, may I remind you, that some people have found a modern Buddha, who seem to act as a radical, even to the extent that doubt the legitimacy and authenticity of Dantha Dathu.

Well all is those is common belief.how can you prove the authencity if all other story telling is fake.

 

[Emios]

Just listen to the first few minutes.

 

[greenthunder]

Why you think i'm not interested. pls do so.I open this thread not to declare i knew everything.But to discuss.

Becouse having been on the interwebs for almost 20 years I have grown weary of online conversations. Most of the time people are looking to affirm their beliefs and not engage in open discussions. Okay then I would like to know your reply to my first post in this thread?