Was the Buddah real?

[Gr3yL3gion]

Zoroaster- Don't know who this is?
Krishna- One of many forms of gods
Mohammed- a person who believes the voices of his head comes from god.
Buddha- see above
Jesus- I was a Christian and I thikn he's real. Maybe just a person who's mad enough to convince himself as a son of god.

 

[Elrohir]

He provided a path for everyone else to follow if they so choose. Kinda like dying for the sins of others.

Yeah, kinda, minus the dying part and the bit about other's sins. So not at all.

If 'enlightenment' is abandoning your family, friends, and all your responsabilities to sit under a tree like a hippy and do nothing then no thanks. I'd rather stay unenlightened, thank you very much.

 

[aneeshm]

He abandoned his family to pursue 'enlightenment' for himself[/I. The main word there is 'himself', I even italicized it for you. Questioning the nature of the universe and trying to better yourself are good goals, but not at the expense of those who depend upon you. Bettering yourself is good, but you still have responsabilities.

Buddah spent his whole life focused on himself. He was selfish.

His abandonment of his family was/is utterly insignificant , considering that he came from the royal family of the time . Whar responsibilities ? Ascending the throne ? Now he's not allowed to abdicate ?

And enlightenment is supposed to be a personal thing - you cannot enlighten someone else's soul . Yes , he was selfish . Because he recognised the sanctity of his own soul , and did not consider it , like many guilt-ridden Christains , to be sinful ( this is what it always comes down to , doesn't it ? ) .

 

[Elrohir]

His abandonment of his family was/is utterly insignificant , considering that he came from the royal family of the time . Whar responsibilities ? Ascending the throne ? Now he's not allowed to abdicate ?

And enlightenment is supposed to be a personal thing - you cannot enlighten someone else's soul . Yes , he was selfish . Because he recognised the sanctity of his own soul , and did not consider it , like many guilt-ridden Christains , to be sinful ( this is what it always comes down to , doesn't it ? ) .

Oh, so abandoning your family doesn't count if they have money? I feel sorry for you wife, you sound like a very cold person. Money is hardly all that there is taking care of someone.

Responsabilities to his wife and child, Rahula. Or don't you consider it irresponsible to just run off to become a monk an abandon your family?

'Sanctity of his own soul'? What does that mean?

'Guilt-ridden Christains'? Christians who truly follow Christ are not 'guilt-ridden'. On the contrary, they are not hounded by the guilt of what they have done, they are pureified by what Christ has done.

Can you truly tell me that you have done nothing wrong? Nothing wrong in your whole life?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Zoroaster- Don't know who this is?
Krishna- One of many forms of gods
Mohammed- a person who believes the voices of his head comes from god.
Buddha- see above
Jesus- I was a Christian and I thikn he's real. Maybe just a person who's mad enough to convince himself as a son of god.

Zoraster was the founder of Zoroasterism or the modern day parsi religion of Iran and India (mostly India now)

http://www.parsionline.com/

Krishna is one of the many manifestations of god within Hinduism, but krishna was important and many stories of him were written down. More than likely there was a real person around which those stories were based. Humans rarely make up tales from nothing, we find it easier to elaborate on what we have seen or heard.
There is little doubt that Mohammed was real, whatever the source of his knowledge.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Yeah, kinda, minus the dying part and the bit about other's sins. So not at all.

If 'enlightenment' is abandoning your family, friends, and all your responsabilities to sit under a tree like a hippy and do nothing then no thanks. I'd rather stay unenlightened, thank you very much.

IIRC Jesus did abandon his family to begin a ministry, collect followers, wander around Judea and tell stories and then die an early death leaving no support for his aging mother and father. He assumed no responsibility other thatn to his mission. He did so for the benefit of all humanity. Those who follow his teachings get to heaven.

The Buddha gave up a life of priviledge to find a way to lessen the suffering of all humanity. He wandered around India collecting followers, teaching them through stories and action. Those who follow the teaching of the buddha become enlightened and escape from the suffering of the world.

 

[blackheart]

Siddartha Gautama wasn't the first Buddha, nor did he claim to be.

 

[blackheart]

If 'enlightenment' is abandoning your family, friends, and all your responsabilities to sit under a tree like a hippy and do nothing then no thanks. I'd rather stay unenlightened, thank you very much.

If it were only that easy...

 

[Elrohir]

IIRC Jesus did abandon his family to begin a ministry, collect followers, wander around Judea and tell stories and then die an early death leaving no support for his aging mother and father. He assumed no responsibility other thatn to his mission. He did so for the benefit of all humanity. Those who follow his teachings get to heaven.

The Buddha gave up a life of priviledge to find a way to lessen the suffering of all humanity. He wandered around India collecting followers, teaching them through stories and action. Those who follow the teaching of the buddha become enlightened and escape from the suffering of the world.

Somehow I don't equate leaving your mother with her family (His adoptive father was likely dead) so you can go save humanity isn't quite the same as leaving your dependant wife and child to go run off and sek 'enlightenment'.

'Aging' mother? Everyone is aging. No, really, she was young when Jesus was born, probably in her early to mid teens, so she wasn't even 50 when he died. That's not that old.

 

[Elrohir]

If it were only that easy...

Wiki it!

....Then, sitting under a pipal tree, which is now known as the Bodhi tree, he vowed never to arise until he had found the Truth. He, at the age of 35, attained Enlightenment; by some traditions, this occurred in approximately May, and, by others, December. Gautama was from then on known as "the awakened one", the Buddha.

As he didn't die, he couldn't have been under that tree for too long. Apparently seekign 'enlightenment' is as easy as finding a pipal tree and setting under it.

 

[Dida]

Wiki it!

As he didn't die, he couldn't have been under that tree for too long. Apparently seekign 'enlightenment' is as easy as finding a pipal tree and setting under it.

what are you talking about???

 

[GenMarshall]

Buddah does of course exist.

 

[Riesstiu IV]

Wiki it!



As he didn't die, he couldn't have been under that tree for too long. Apparently seekign 'enlightenment' is as easy as finding a pipal tree and setting under it.

And apparently being the "son of god" is as easy as having your mother claim to be a virgin after going through a biological process that has for millions of years needed the assistance of the opposite sex.

 

[punkbass2000]

Wiki it!



As he didn't die, he couldn't have been under that tree for too long. Apparently seekign 'enlightenment' is as easy as finding a pipal tree and setting under it.

Since Jesus was seen days after his supposed crucification, I guess he didn't really die for the sins of humanity. How selfish.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Somehow I don't equate leaving your mother with her family (His adoptive father was likely dead) so you can go save humanity isn't quite the same as leaving your dependant wife and child to go run off and seek 'enlightenment'.

Of course you don't see them as the same, you're biased. The Buddha's family was left in good hands and well cared for. he sacrificed his love for them in order to benefit all mankind through the eight fold path.

'Aging' mother? Everyone is aging. No, really, she was young when Jesus was born, probably in her early to mid teens, so she wasn't even 50 when he died. That's not that old.

Fifty was a ripe old age in roman times. Modern life expectancy cannot be applied to first C romans. Joseph's status is "unknown" not "dead." In any case the bible leaves him out of the picture so all we know is that jesus left his mother unsupported. Not very loving or considerate. For all we know she died a penniless beggar sitting under an olive tree waiting for enlightenment.

Here is an interesting link to roman life expectancy. The older you got the greater the chance you would live longer. If you made to age 10 you could expect to live until 51, etc.

http://www.utexas.edu/depts/classics/documents/Life.html

 

[Taliesin]

Oh, so abandoning your family doesn't count if they have money? I feel sorry for you wife, you sound like a very cold person. Money is hardly all that there is taking care of someone.

Responsabilities to his wife and child, Rahula. Or don't you consider it irresponsible to just run off to become a monk an abandon your family?

'Sanctity of his own soul'? What does that mean?

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters-yes even his own life -he cannot be my disciple." Luke 14:26

This basic idea is important to messianic and individualist religions like Christianity and Buddhism, which grew out of more collectivist and patriarchal religions in which the idea of giving up worldly ties was anathema.

Keep in mind that Buddha, once he attained enlightenment, did not leave the world. He could have, because he had freed himself of all ties to it. Instead he returned out of compassion and love to teach others how to escape samsara, like Jesus from the desert or Plato's thinker from the sunlight. He chose to go back into the cave. And he stuck around for forty years, which is much more than you can say for Jesus.

 

[cgannon64]

Yes, he existed, but I question the wisdom of his, well, wisdom.

 

[Elrohir]

Since Jesus was seen days after his supposed crucification, I guess he didn't really die for the sins of humanity. How selfish.

Or he died and came back to life. Just a thought.

Of course you don't see them as the same, you're biased. The Buddha's family was left in good hands and well cared for. he sacrificed his love for them in order to benefit all mankind through the eight fold path.

And you're not?

Yes, the Buddha and his followers have done wonders for humanity. His Eight Fold Path has swept through the entire globe, revolutionizing how we think and putting an end to violence and putting us all onto the proper path to enlightenment.

Yeah, and the moon is made out of swiss cheese, and I'm the Dragon Reborn.

Fifty was a ripe old age in roman times. Modern life expectancy cannot be applied to first C romans. Joseph's status is "unknown" not "dead." In any case the bible leaves him out of the picture so all we know is that jesus left his mother unsupported. Not very loving or considerate. For all we know she died a penniless beggar sitting under an olive tree waiting for enlightenment.

A fair point. However as she was giving parties around the time he started his ministry, it sounds like she was well off. And the Jewish system of taking care of widows was very efficient.

"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters-yes even his own life -he cannot be my disciple." Luke 14:26

Not hate as in hate, but hate as in compared to the love you must show Christ.

Keep in mind that Buddha, once he attained enlightenment, did not leave the world. He could have, because he had freed himself of all ties to it. Instead he returned out of compassion and love to teach others how to escape samsara, like Jesus from the desert or Plato's thinker from the sunlight. He chose to go back into the cave. And he stuck around for forty years, which is much more than you can say for Jesus

Yes, freed of all ties, except for hunger, and thirst, and sleep, and the wish for adoration and worship from all his followers.... So yeah, he was really free from all ties.

I'm sorry, but being told that the only way to be happy is to not care sounds like a really screwed up way of thinking. I'd rather be unhappy with my life (And I'm not) and care about the people around me than be happy because I no longer care about anything but myself. Love and compassion indeed.

Actually, that's a lot less. Buddah had to deal with other people's crap for 40 years after 'attainting enlightenment'. Jesus has had to deal with humanities stupidity for 2000 years, and is continuing to do so.

 

[Taliesin]

Not hate as in hate, but hate as in compared to the love you must show Christ.

Right. Which means, precisely, that we must prefer salvation or enlightenment to our worldly cares and responsibility. If a Christian needed to choose, he would have to leave his family behind just like Buddha did. Jesus demands no less.

Yes, freed of all ties, except for hunger, and thirst, and sleep, and the wish for adoration and worship from all his followers.... So yeah, he was really free from all ties.

You miss the point. He could have left the world by starving to death and never would have returned to it. He could have experienced parinirvana right then and there. Instead, he put it off by forty years in order to show others the Noble Path (and definitely not to collect their worship).

I'm sorry, but being told that the only way to be happy is to not care sounds like a really screwed up way of thinking. I'd rather be unhappy with my life (And I'm not) and care about the people around me than be happy because I no longer care about anything but myself. Love and compassion indeed.

You would learn to care only about your true Self, which is none other than God. This is the same Self that inhabits your fellow men, and to love them or to love God is one and the same.

Out of love Buddha provides a path for you to salvation. If you think you can be happy without accepting his invitation to follow him, then go ahead and reject him. It's your soul to do with as you please.

Yes, the Buddha and his followers have done wonders for humanity. His Eight Fold Path has swept through the entire globe, revolutionizing how we think and putting an end to violence and putting us all onto the proper path to enlightenment.

Clearly you haven't heard of a continent called Asia if you think Buddhism is inconsequential. No, his teachings have not brought peace to Earth. Have any teachings done so? Have Jesus'? Perhaps the problem is that people do not follow Buddha with enough faith and resolve.

 

[Ramius75]

most probably someone real. but then he is not a "god" nor supreme being. To me, "buddha" is just a name. A title given to someone by the ordinary ppl who acheive "enlightement" not really important to them anyway. but some ppl choose to worship them instead of been "enlighten" themselve.