99.9% of Theravada is primitive, false

[Manopubbangama]

I read somewhere on the internet that almost all buddhism is false. That a tiny vangaurd of intellectual elites and their followers within the past 40 have revived the True Esoteric message of the Buddha.


Discuss.

[cappuccino]

"And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech."

— SN 45.8

[Mr Man]

I read somewhere on the internet that almost all buddhism is false. That a tiny vangaurd of intellectual elites and their followers within the past 40 have revived the True Esoteric message of the Buddha.


Discuss.

True and false are not relevant quantifiers for Buddhism.

https://dhammawiki.com/index.php/6_qual ... the_Dhamma

[Antaradhana]

Thick trolling

[Idappaccayata]

"And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech."

— SN 45.8

[Manopubbangama]

The view is indefensible.

Lets see if it will be defended by it's owner(s)....

If it is not claimed within 48 hours thread can be closed and the silence will speak volumes.

[2600htz]

50% percent of the time, this topic is banned everytime.

[SDC]

50% percent of the time, this topic is banned everytime.

"It's made with pieces of real [Buddhism]...so you know it's good."

[JamesTheGiant]

I read somewhere on the internet that almost all buddhism is false. That a tiny vangaurd of intellectual elites and their followers within the past 40 have revived the True Esoteric message of the Buddha.

I don't know anything about this. But it sounds interesting, I would be interested to know what this True Esoteric message is, if it's not just Manopubbangama trolling.

[chownah]

"100% of theravada is primitive, false"......there, now you can say "I read somewhere on the internet that all buddhism is false."

But back to the topic, I'm really wanting to see what they say is the 0.1% which is not primitive and false. I'm wondering if it is stuff that I agree with or not.
chownah

[DooDoot]

I read somewhere on the internet that almost all buddhism is false.

Where exactly was this read? From your own post, below? (click to enlarge)

If is often said: "the first sign of madness is talking to yourself". What about reading your own posts? Is the 2nd sign of madness reading & repeating your own posts, as though your own idea is another person's idea?

[Polar Bear]

The Pali Suttas recognize their own unreliability:

Furthermore, take another teacher who is an oral transmitter, who takes oral transmission to be the truth. He teaches by oral transmission, by the lineage of testament, by canonical authority. But when a teacher takes oral transmission to be the truth, some of that is well learned, some poorly learned, some true, and some otherwise. A sensible person reflects on this matter in this way: ‘This teacher takes oral transmission to be the truth. He teaches by oral transmission, by the lineage of testament, by canonical authority. But when a teacher takes oral transmission to be the truth, some of that is well learned, some poorly learned, some true, and some otherwise. This spiritual life is unreliable.’ Realizing this, they leave disappointed. This is the second kind of unreliable spiritual life.

https://suttacentral.net/mn76/en/sujato

“Bhāradvāja, first you went by conviction. Now you speak of unbroken tradition. There are five things that can turn out in two ways in the here & now. Which five? Conviction, liking, unbroken tradition, reasoning by analogy, & an agreement through pondering views. These are the five things that can turn out in two ways in the here & now. Now some things are firmly held in conviction and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not firmly held in conviction, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. Some things are well-liked… truly an unbroken tradition… well-reasoned… Some things are well-pondered and yet vain, empty, & false. Some things are not well-pondered, and yet they are genuine, factual, & unmistaken. In these cases it isn’t proper for a observant person who safeguards the truth to come to a definite conclusion, ‘Only this is true; anything else is worthless.”
“But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth.”
“If a person has conviction, his statement, ‘This is my conviction,’ safeguards the truth. But he doesn’t yet come to the definite conclusion that ‘Only this is true; anything else is worthless.’ To this extent, Bhāradvāja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth.
“If a person likes something… holds an unbroken tradition… has something reasoned through analogy… has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, ‘This is what I agree to, having pondered views,’ safeguards the truth. But he doesn’t yet come to the definite conclusion that ‘Only this is true; anything else is worthless.’ To this extent, Bhāradvāja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth.”

https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN95.html

[Spiny Norman]

But back to the topic, I'm really wanting to see what they say is the 0.1% which is not primitive and false. I'm wondering if it is stuff that I agree with or not.
chownah

Me too. It probably isn't though!

[Adwinistrator]

I read somewhere on the internet that almost all buddhism is false. That a tiny vangaurd of intellectual elites and their followers within the past 40 have revived the True Esoteric message of the Buddha.


Discuss.

Are you referring to the Harold Musson who disrobed and killed himself?

[anthbrown84]

Whether this is or isn't trolling, I'd be very careful

The Buddha talks about people denying The Buddha was who he said he was after he had declared it... And their destination is not a good one

So even if you don't believe in The Buddhas the teachings, then please be careful. I say this with compassion not judgement, after all beings are the owners of their own actions

But please, if it's only for fun, don't over step the mark or you may regret it later

With a smile

Anthony

P.s. The Buddha didn't teach Buddhism, he taught The Suttas. We have as close as we can get, almost to the very source of His words.... That is enough