From the Life Essentials and find out Buddhism Thinking Wrong Conclusion
27 Oct '18 08:26From the Life Essentials and find out Buddhism Thinking Wrong Conclusion
Author :Chang Kai-Chi 張開基
The Core Discussion about Buddhism
I once said that the first essence of life is to "survive". This is a factual truth that cannot be denied or opposed. Any attempt to negate or oppose, the necessary condition is people need to be "alive" or what the purpose about opposing and negating?
Since "alive" is the most important thing in life then death will be the reverse sides. Therefore, any claim that will cause death will become The main enemy of alive.
It happens that Buddhism is the main religion against all life because it completely embraces To talk about this, we must first adjust our focal points from the second day after the death of "Sakyamuni" until today for 2,600 years. Excluding all classics, regardless of the true or falsehood sects plus different interpretations, all the eminent monks and nobles of all ages, the doctrines and creeds, all Buddhist activities such as signs, totems and all temples in the world, all the statues of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas . etc. Now we only focus on Sakyamuni.
When talking about "Sakyamuni", people might be familiar with his life about educations , later monastic practices, and enlightenment under the Bodhi tree and forty-five years Buddhism related lecturing. All these various preaching could be searched in books or Internet or from devout Buddhists study. But will skip them here, nor mention his transition thinking along different periods, etc.
Let us only address the Sakyamuni’s personal thoughts and the basic teachings of primitive Buddhism:
I use brackets to list: "emptyness", "anatman", "not allow to include self", "everything is illusory", "no eternal soul", "karma rewards is true", "abandon desire" " bitterness", "All sentient beings suffer", "Stop the reincarnation", and the ultimate achievement goal is "Silent Nirvana."
In terms of behavior, "Sakyamuni" does not work for rest of his life, and relies on foraging for a living. He once taught his disciples to "reflections on repulsiveness about human body " to envision under facial appearance of physical body. And encourage believer to become monks and nun. Ignore the existing living before death.
The most important thing is to teach disciples and believers how to "free from reincarnation". The highest guiding principle was to reach "Silent Nirvana". The former will not get proved until death, and the latter need to wait after death so could finalize the practice.
Therefore, it is unquestionable that "Buddhism is a religion that completely embraces death."
Perhaps some people would think that "Buddhism" was unique in the history of Indian religion. But the truth is "Buddhism" was actually a reformist from "Hinduism". Plus, "Buddhism" philosophy always are under the encompass of the Middle Ages India philosophical thinking historically.
Let's take a look at the medieval philosophical factions in India. There are so-called "six normal norms" and "two side tracks";
India traditionally refers to the six-party philosophy of the number theory, the yoga school, the victory debating, the Orthodox school, the Vedanta and the Miman sentiment, which recognized the Vedic authority in the Middle Ages, as the orthodox school (Six Zhengdao). Buddhism, Jainism, etc., which negate the authority of the Vedic, were called non-Orthodox (two side tracks). As for materialism and hedonism, the "shun world (follow general people’s life style)" is not a philosophy, but a decadent attitude towards life.
Although the eight sects of philosophy in India each had their own solid theoretical basis: they were also arrogant in their debates on "meta-science" (logic). However, no matter how hostile or merging, the final goal of the eight philosophies is Consistent as "liberation"!
It is so strange their purpose of life is to get released after death? In this world, seems only Indians will unanimously recognize "humanity’s ultimate goal of living is to get deliberated after death”.
This is very ridiculous!
However, this is absolutely related to India's history background, political religion and customs of the people. Since the "Aryans" defeated the high culture but low combat military force agricultural-oriented "Daro tribes”with the nomadic (lower culture and sufficient military), to facilitate the demise of power, wealth and social status, the indiscriminate "caste system" has been established so far. In the meantime, a mythical "Monu Codes" has been invented to apply the slave code. This is purely a self-advantage clause of the Brahmin monks, and it further adopt "Karma Rewarding" to strengthen this system.
Therefore, under such an atmosphere, "Sakyamuni" was not a surprise to create a completely different religion. Instead, he advocated "the way of liberation" and simply opposes it against opposition. Hindu "I am Atman", so he advocated "no self." In order to oppose the "caste system" so advocate "the equality of all living being". Advocate "six track reincarnations" in opposition to the "three track reincarnations". In order to oppose the Hindu men/women erotic enjoyment so he advocated "destruction of desire" "Sakyamuni" advocated “beyond reincarnation", "destruction of desire" and "silent nirvana". Are those all relate to death and against of life's righteousness? It implied human beings are alive with meaningless?
Or assuming that everything in life is illusory and painful? Therefore, "living" is not necessary. It will only fall into the circle of reincarnation or have to practice earliest to reach the perfect state of "silent nirvana" after death!
So it could conclude as "Buddhism" from the "Sakyamuni" era was completely contrary to "the first essentials of life"? It is the religion embraces death?
Should we focus on "living" to be as natural as life of all species? Or do you agree with the Sakyamuni ‘s sinister paradox of "crazy and abandoning life"?
Looking at such straightforward instructions, will you continue to believe in Buddhism? Believe that Buddhism is the truth? Do you even want to be a monk or nun who wants to run away natural life?
Note: I once again declare "the demise of Buddhism"! Because "from the second day after the death of Sakyamuni" until today, it is nearly 2,600 years and everything related to Buddhism, including all classics, regardless of the true scriptures, all the different denotations and sects, all ages High morality, all doctrines and creeds; and all Buddhists and all Buddhist activities, signs, totems and all temples in the world, all the statues of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas ------ all add up together and the final achievements are not as good as any comment from this article.
FB:https://www.facebook.com/groups/2260704707486729/
Author :Chang Kai-Chi 張開基
The Core Discussion about Buddhism
I once said that the first essence of life is to "survive". This is a factual truth that cannot be denied or opposed. Any attempt to negate or oppose, the necessary condition is people need to be "alive" or what the purpose about opposing and negating?
Since "alive" is the most important thing in life then death will be the reverse sides. Therefore, any claim that will cause death will become The main enemy of alive.
It happens that Buddhism is the main religion against all life because it completely embraces To talk about this, we must first adjust our focal points from the second day after the death of "Sakyamuni" until today for 2,600 years. Excluding all classics, regardless of the true or falsehood sects plus different interpretations, all the eminent monks and nobles of all ages, the doctrines and creeds, all Buddhist activities such as signs, totems and all temples in the world, all the statues of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas . etc. Now we only focus on Sakyamuni.
When talking about "Sakyamuni", people might be familiar with his life about educations , later monastic practices, and enlightenment under the Bodhi tree and forty-five years Buddhism related lecturing. All these various preaching could be searched in books or Internet or from devout Buddhists study. But will skip them here, nor mention his transition thinking along different periods, etc.
Let us only address the Sakyamuni’s personal thoughts and the basic teachings of primitive Buddhism:
I use brackets to list: "emptyness", "anatman", "not allow to include self", "everything is illusory", "no eternal soul", "karma rewards is true", "abandon desire" " bitterness", "All sentient beings suffer", "Stop the reincarnation", and the ultimate achievement goal is "Silent Nirvana."
In terms of behavior, "Sakyamuni" does not work for rest of his life, and relies on foraging for a living. He once taught his disciples to "reflections on repulsiveness about human body " to envision under facial appearance of physical body. And encourage believer to become monks and nun. Ignore the existing living before death.
The most important thing is to teach disciples and believers how to "free from reincarnation". The highest guiding principle was to reach "Silent Nirvana". The former will not get proved until death, and the latter need to wait after death so could finalize the practice.
Therefore, it is unquestionable that "Buddhism is a religion that completely embraces death."
Perhaps some people would think that "Buddhism" was unique in the history of Indian religion. But the truth is "Buddhism" was actually a reformist from "Hinduism". Plus, "Buddhism" philosophy always are under the encompass of the Middle Ages India philosophical thinking historically.
Let's take a look at the medieval philosophical factions in India. There are so-called "six normal norms" and "two side tracks";
India traditionally refers to the six-party philosophy of the number theory, the yoga school, the victory debating, the Orthodox school, the Vedanta and the Miman sentiment, which recognized the Vedic authority in the Middle Ages, as the orthodox school (Six Zhengdao). Buddhism, Jainism, etc., which negate the authority of the Vedic, were called non-Orthodox (two side tracks). As for materialism and hedonism, the "shun world (follow general people’s life style)" is not a philosophy, but a decadent attitude towards life.
Although the eight sects of philosophy in India each had their own solid theoretical basis: they were also arrogant in their debates on "meta-science" (logic). However, no matter how hostile or merging, the final goal of the eight philosophies is Consistent as "liberation"!
It is so strange their purpose of life is to get released after death? In this world, seems only Indians will unanimously recognize "humanity’s ultimate goal of living is to get deliberated after death”.
This is very ridiculous!
However, this is absolutely related to India's history background, political religion and customs of the people. Since the "Aryans" defeated the high culture but low combat military force agricultural-oriented "Daro tribes”with the nomadic (lower culture and sufficient military), to facilitate the demise of power, wealth and social status, the indiscriminate "caste system" has been established so far. In the meantime, a mythical "Monu Codes" has been invented to apply the slave code. This is purely a self-advantage clause of the Brahmin monks, and it further adopt "Karma Rewarding" to strengthen this system.
Therefore, under such an atmosphere, "Sakyamuni" was not a surprise to create a completely different religion. Instead, he advocated "the way of liberation" and simply opposes it against opposition. Hindu "I am Atman", so he advocated "no self." In order to oppose the "caste system" so advocate "the equality of all living being". Advocate "six track reincarnations" in opposition to the "three track reincarnations". In order to oppose the Hindu men/women erotic enjoyment so he advocated "destruction of desire" "Sakyamuni" advocated “beyond reincarnation", "destruction of desire" and "silent nirvana". Are those all relate to death and against of life's righteousness? It implied human beings are alive with meaningless?
Or assuming that everything in life is illusory and painful? Therefore, "living" is not necessary. It will only fall into the circle of reincarnation or have to practice earliest to reach the perfect state of "silent nirvana" after death!
So it could conclude as "Buddhism" from the "Sakyamuni" era was completely contrary to "the first essentials of life"? It is the religion embraces death?
Should we focus on "living" to be as natural as life of all species? Or do you agree with the Sakyamuni ‘s sinister paradox of "crazy and abandoning life"?
Looking at such straightforward instructions, will you continue to believe in Buddhism? Believe that Buddhism is the truth? Do you even want to be a monk or nun who wants to run away natural life?
Note: I once again declare "the demise of Buddhism"! Because "from the second day after the death of Sakyamuni" until today, it is nearly 2,600 years and everything related to Buddhism, including all classics, regardless of the true scriptures, all the different denotations and sects, all ages High morality, all doctrines and creeds; and all Buddhists and all Buddhist activities, signs, totems and all temples in the world, all the statues of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas ------ all add up together and the final achievements are not as good as any comment from this article.
FB:https://www.facebook.com/groups/2260704707486729/
YouTube