Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He did not reject what he was taught, he built on it. His method of contemplation and inquiry was exactly as he was taught, he followed the same footsteps of the sages he learnt from. He rejected the practices, not the core philosophy. He taught people how to think and live a life of simplicity. He showed by example.
i agree that if a new path develops, it is not a "rejection" of what came before, but rather a spin-off. A spin-off of a TV show does not "reject" the original show. It takes elements of it and builds on that. Someone working for a successful company may leave the company to start a new company. That is not a rejection of it. That which came before, gives rise to that which follows. And is responsible for not only its success, but its very existence in the first place. That is hardly a "rejection."
i agree that if a new path develops, it is not a "rejection" of what came before, but rather a spin-off. A spin-off of a TV show does not "reject" the original show. It takes elements of it and builds on that. Someone working for a successful company may leave the company to start a new company. That is not a rejection of it. That which came before, gives rise to that which follows. And is responsible for not only its success, but its very existence in the first place. That is hardly a "rejection."
There were specific Hindu concepts that he rejected. I've posted about them several times.
There were specific Hindu concepts that he rejected. I've posted about them several times.
He did not reject the body of the texts of Vedanta. He rejected the Vedic rites. Lots of Hindus rejected and reject the Vedic rites. The whole Bhakti movement rejected the Vedic rites. The path that Bhuddha showed was centered on alleviating suffering, for the here and now.
Religion evolves along with the needs of the people.
If you have so much respect for Buddha's teaching, to the point that you are preaching what you think he believed in, why aren't you a Buddhist?
You might notice that I don't try to lecture about Hinduism. Hint, hint, hint.
I don't have to become a Buddhist to follow his teachings. I don't have to become a Christian to value Jesus"s teachings. Or Muslim to be stirred by Sufi music and devotion. Divinity is not trapped in boxes, it is everywhere, including in me. Devotion is the sense that connects all religions.
My understanding of Buddhism is you're supposed to figure it out yourself. That's the only way it counts.
If that were true we would not have his 4 Noble Truth and 8 fold path handed down for generations. One needs the fundamentals mastered before figuring out what to reject.
He did not reject the body of the texts of Vedanta. He rejected the Vedic rites. Lots of Hindus rejected and reject the Vedic rites. The whole Bhakti movement rejected the Vedic rites. The path that Bhuddha showed was centered on alleviating suffering, for the here and now.
Religion evolves along with the needs of the people.
More than that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
