inference of a multiverse more plausible now: dark flow (The limitations of science)

by xeno6696 @, Sonoran Desert, Friday, January 07, 2011, 01:55 (5071 days ago) @ David Turell

Clear thinking regarding a source 'for all that is', to quote Bella, requires divorcing oneself from all Biblical references, studying scientific findings, and THEN going back and looking at the Bible for interesting observations and insights. And this appplies also to the ancient Hindu and Buddhist books.
> > 
> > There is no creation myth in Zen Buddhism.
> 
> My paragraph does not state that there is a creation myth in Buddhism. Buddhism believes in perpetual cycles.-Only in hindi/tibetan buddhism. South/Eastern Buddhism abandons cycles beyond that of a parable.-I only brought it up as compared to the other religions you mentioned, Zen has no stories that deal with how man or the world came to be. This is considered unimportant. The only thing important in Zen is the 'here and now' and a steadfast commitment to end human suffering.-In regards to the discussion you were having, there is very little of natural science that bears any impact on Buddhist scripture. The the syncretic nature of hindu/tibetan Buddhism that you're aware of here isn't canon. (Not that 'canon' is an accurate term in the same sentence as Buddhism...)

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum