I always felt like Buddhism was more a philosophy than a religion. It can be used as a religion, but it really boils down to "Life sucks, but you can be happy if you stop thinking about how much life sucks".
Some sects are more dogmatic than others, with some woo woo metaphysical nonsense and ceremonial practices. Secular Buddhism though is definitely just the philosophy and practice of mindfulness that uses the same allegories but ditches the more problematic stuff.
I have been to South East Asia and married a women from the Thervada tradition. If it isn't a religion I don't know what that word means.
Yes of course you can treat it like a philosophy. You can pretty much do whatever you want. I am pretty confident I can treat 3rd wave feminist thought as a metaphysics system if I put my mind to it, I am also confident that I could interpret a child's drawing via a Marxist-Hegelian lens. Anything can be modeled as anything else. I can model the sun and the banana. Both appear yellow to me, both have dark spots, both make human life more enjoyable.
The issue is if that means anything, is it useful to us? So yes you can go thru their 25 centuries of writing spread over an area 3x of Europe, with 4x the population. Filter out everything you want and keep only what you want. Then slap a label on it called Secular Buddhism. You can do this, but don't really expect us to all say what you are doing relates at all to what they are doing.
No offense but I don't think you've read any of the texts or seen any Bhuddist practice if you think so. The corpus of texts that belong to the different traditions are massive and Bhuddists have everything from prayer to pilgrimage. It's only not a religion if you ignore everything.
You could say the same about Christianity. "Life sucks, but you can be happy if you think about the fact that the suffering is temporary."
To be fair, I wouldn't lump Buddhism in with other theistic religions. Of course it can be, but a lot of schools avoid any form of theism. Plus, it's almostvdefinitely the least arbitrary and hypocritical of the Big 5-7
Eh, it's still based on completely unfounded, unsupported, and nonsensical ideas. Whether or not there's a personal god doesn't make any real difference IMO.
I mostly agree with you, but the act of using meditation to increase one's mental well being, in particular, is not an unfounded or nonsensical idea. It may have been when it was first described, but we have scientific data now that shows that meditation can be pretty beneficial for people.
but a lot of schools avoid any form of theism.
Name two
I remember asking my mother as a child how we knew we were right and her answer was “you have to have faith”. That was the beginning of the end for me. I started refusing to go to church when I was about 10 as I couldn’t fathom how we could just “believe” we were right. Plus how could god punish those who weren’t exposed to our church? It just didn’t make any logical sense to me at that age.
spiritually speaking they are correct... They just picked Nike brand instead of reality brand, so everything's bullshit.
Faith is prayer. Asking is not.
Does it make more logical sense now? 🤔
I increasingly find it bizarre when people committed to the idea of an intelligent designer for our universe ignore the fact that the 'design' has no absolute frame of reference and is relative, down to the recent trend in physics of recognizing relative facts vs stable facts.
Especially bizarre are the ones that do this while committed to the idea the intelligent designer is one of light (i.e. 1 John 1:5), given that fundamentally baked into the design is the fact that light when not able to be directly observed can be more than one thing at once.
But no, they manage to hold fast to the idea it was carefully designed while showing no interest in learning more of that supposed design outside of what they've been told to believe within their giant generational game of telephone back to the days when people peed on their hands to clean them and lamented that why it rained was outside the realm of possible human knowledge thus it was futile to try to understand God.
Poor Baha'i, they never get meme-mocked
One of the best things ever created: https://youtu.be/iYq_-zju_P8
To be fair, any story is just a fart in the wind. Even the sciencey ones.
A serious investigator sees for himself.
Sorry what "sciencey story" is a fart in the wind? Because I imagine either you don't know what a hypothesis is or whatever example you have doesn't actually follow the scientific method.
That’s exactly what Einstein said about quantum mechanics.
