18 thoughts on “Happy Buddha Purnima”

  1. Thanks for the remainder about Buddha Poornima. Ever since you wrote that essay in 2007, I’ve listened to the Hrdaya sutra hundreds of times! And this particular version is absolutely splendid.

    Like

  2. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein)

    I like a quote by Anthony hopkins in a movie where he says,’ i like Buddhism, but what would a snail have to do to get good karma?’
    Kind of wonder how Animals become higher beings??

    Like

  3. The doctrines Dharma, Karma, yoga, Rebirth and Moksha (nirvana or cessation of incarnation) were adopted by buddhists as is from vedas, just in case some of you dont know.

    Like

  4. “I like a quote by Anthony hopkins in a movie where he says,’ i like Buddhism, but what would a snail have to do to get good karma?”

    What a silly comment, displaying utter ignorance. Since when did the opinion of actors on serious topics suddenly become important? Only in perverted times like ours! Reincarnation is a metaphysical myth to prove the existence of soul–it’s not to be taken literally. Even the philosopher David Hume agreed with it–saying there was no other way to prove existence of soul….

    Like

  5. “The doctrines Dharma, Karma, yoga, Rebirth and Moksha (nirvana or cessation of incarnation) were adopted by buddhists as is from vedas, just in case some of you dont know.”

    These are well known to serious scholars of Buddhism–Buddhism has a long history–what is known as Buddhism today is distinctly different from what the Buddha taught judging from the earliest Pali scriptures-the fashion is to turn the Sakyamuni into a democratic humanitarian–and so Buddhism appeals to all sorts of “new age types” who lack any discipline or rigor and are enamored of a feel-good-religion which indulges them…Buddha merely tried to reintroduce “vigor” into the original ideals which were being decayed, and a serious reading of Buddhism shows it’s not all that different from Brahminism—but today the various offshoots of Buddhism which have adapted to local traditions like Tibetan buddhism, Zen and what not do not like to acknowledge this fundamental truth which is available to all who take care to study the earliest Pali scriptures.

    Like

  6. “First, let us study the quaint phenomenon. Is it not curious that, whilst under the terrific onset of modern scientific research, all the old forts of Western dogmatic religions are crumbling into dust; whilst the sledgehammer blows of modern science are pulverizing the porcelain mass of systems whose foundation is either in faith or in belief or in the majority of votes of church synods; whilst Western theology is at its wit’s end to accommodate itself to the ever-rising tide of aggressive modern thought; whilst in all other sacred books the texts have been stretched to their utmost tension under the ever-increasing pressure of modern thought, and the majority of them are broken and have been stored away in lumber rooms; whilst the vast majority of thoughtful Western humanity have broken asunder all their ties with the church and are drifting about in a sea of unrest, the religions which have drunk the water of life At that fountain of light, the Vedas – Hinduism and Buddhism-alone are reviving?

    The restless Western atheist or agnostic finds in the Gita or in the Dhammapada the only place where his soul can anchor.

    The tables have been turned, and the Hindu, who saw through tears of despair his ancient homestead covered with incendiary fire, ignited by unfriendly hands, now sees, when the searchlight of modern thought has dispersed the smoke, that his home is the one that is standing in all its strength, and all the rest have either vanished or are building their houses anew after the Hindu plan. He has wiped away his tears and has found that the axe that tried to cut down to the roots the has proved the merciful knife of the surgeon.”

    – SV

    Like

  7. It is interesting to note that in early Buddhism when it was a thoroughly virile religion as opposed to the corruptions you see today when it has become the refuge of all kinds of discontents from other faiths who shy away from and are uncomfortable with any form of rigor, what was asked of new initiates: “Are you a man?” and man in those times meant who had within him “latent yet astir the very Divine, the Highest, the Most..”(quote Rhys Davids “Sakya”)

    Like

  9. Lrissa,
    for ease of understanding you may want to switch to hinduism or sanatana dharma to be accurate and drop bramhinism etc..no offence..

    Like

  11. larrisa wrote:
    “What a silly comment, displaying utter ignorance. Since when did the opinion of actors on serious topics suddenly become important? Only in perverted times like ours! Reincarnation is a metaphysical myth to prove the existence of soul–it’s not to be taken literally. Even the philosopher David Hume agreed with it–saying there was no other way to prove existence of soul….”

    Who is David Hume?If david hume is a great philosopher, Buddha was the enlightened one…i.e, he understood the real nature of everything on this planet. I am talking about Buddha’s words here. Buddha never said anything about soul…he spoke about mind and what happens to it after body dies. Who is talking about soul here?MIND!=SOUL.

    Regarding hopkins comment…it’s a perfectly sane question any decent intelligent person would get. Ask the author of this blog about karma…there is a lot of science to it. ‘You become what you think is karma’. And rebirth is not only re-incarnation….every time something arises in mind is rebirth. Buddha got rid of it and hence the term “no-mind”.

    Like

  12. harsha,
    we are defining some basic terms here, before embarking on debating them.So what is atma and what is mind then? Assuming atma is translated as soul.Lets skip soul and stick to atma and mind duo, go ahead and define the later two words

    Like

  13. @Harsha

    Buddha said a lot of things concerning the soul scattered all over Pali sources. It is not correct to use later developments of Buddhism and its various later sects to judge the original–most serious scholars say the more you study the earliest Pali scriptures in depth, the more you see that Buddhism is not all that different from Hinduism. Coomaraswamy noted that Buddhism is “today most famous for what it originally never taught.”
    This is not the place to go into such detail but the following authors are good guides to the early Buddhism. The Living Thoughts of Gotama the Buddha by Dr. A.K. Comaraswamy
    Doctrine of the Buddha by George Grimm
    Studies in the Origins of Buddhism by G.C. Pande
    Sakya or Buddhist Origins by Dr. C.A.F. Rhys Davids (and other books by same author)
    The Doctrine of Awakening by Julius Evola
    Indian Buddhism by Dr. Nakamura
    Divine Revelation in Pali Buddhism by Peter Masefield
    Self & Non-Self in Early Buddhism by Perez-Ramon
    The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy by C. Sharma
    Indian Philosophy by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan

    Like

  14. Donno what atma or soul is..! Debate ends…thank you. I’m not here to disrespect any religion or anyone.

    larissa and surya..i dont know your motive, but i feel your questions and debates are not worth my time. peace.

    Like

  15. @Harsha
    I was merely responding to your comments. I find it useless as well to talk about things that one has not taken the time to study oneself, for one just utters unexamined half-truths. It is also not worth my time to discuss with those who are willing to accept that which they have not properly examined themselves or thought about…That is why I gave you accounts by serious scholars to support what I suggested…

    Like

  16. merely responding to my comments? Hmmm…i felt like u said i was an ignorant man for qouting ‘anthony hopkins’. Obviously you are rude…but i didn’t care and still replied and then u suggest me that i am a retard as i know half truth and should keep my mouth shut. I think u have a complex that shows off here. Correct me if i am wrong, i am beginning to like it when i am wrong. Especially in understanding people. thank you.

    Like

  17. @Harsha
    Well I don’t see why I am rude for saying that. I merely suggested that “reincarnation” is a metaphysical myth and as such was never meant to be taken literally…so your quoted comment appeared meaningless to me…Don’t see how I am being rude…

    Like

  18. Harsha, i wanted a simple debate and not a scholarly one here, as I myself am no religious scholar. I have a great collection of University degrees in another unrelated discipline though. I regulary read the American (kuiui)Hindu Monastery free news letters and got myself educated in some basic hindu doctrines. I can say hindus (until recently myself included) are the most religiously illiterate when compared to others. They never stop chiming in with their own utterances about faith. The likes of,’ hinduism is not a religion, hindu canbe be a christian or an atheist etc’, are the shocking statements I read in US dailies.
    The Himalayanacademy.com explained that body experiences pain, hunger, cold etc., mind feels joy, anger, sorrow etc and atma doesnt experience any above. It is this atma which takes rebirths. Once adequate good karma is accrued thru dharma and yoga then the atma merges with brahman and thats moksha (no more rebirths). Not lecturing you, thats roughly what the all white hindu monastery stated, clearly i can not match the skills of the learned monks who dedicated their lives to hinduism. Other american hindu monks are David Frawley of New Mexico and Frank Morales of Nebraska….there got to be a lot more…cheers

    Like

Comments are closed.