格鲁修学社区

 找回密码
 注册社区
搜索
热搜: 活动 交友 discuz
楼主: 云涛问路

佛教是迷信吗

[复制链接]
发表于 2014-1-20 20:24 | 显示全部楼层
嘉江悲祥 发表于 2014-1-20 20:05
在印度庙里上过课?老大真的是什么都信过啊


青年派的奇幻漂流
发表于 2014-1-20 20:25 | 显示全部楼层
blursky1058 发表于 2014-1-20 20:03
住在那里,为了研究对手,最终打对手?
以前有基督徒混佛教的寺庙里面,做过这类的事情。

不是啦。打印度教干吗?他们也不惹人。
只是因为认识,当时穷,没地方住、吃。他们提供了这个机会。连续一年半,然后住隔壁(真的就是隔着一墙壁)、吃饭时候就过去吃,这样好像又过了一年左右吧?!
发表于 2014-1-20 20:28 | 显示全部楼层
嘉江悲祥 发表于 2014-1-20 20:05
在印度庙里上过课?老大真的是什么都信过啊


我不相信。只是当时住那里,每天早上4点半念经、法会,然后上梵文经典课。然后我上大学(如果不出去,8点又有法会)。晚上6点念经、法会,然后又上梵文经典课。住那里就必须参加啊。
发表于 2014-1-20 20:32 | 显示全部楼层
上善如水 发表于 2014-1-20 20:28
我不相信。只是当时住那里,每天早上4点半念经、法会,然后上课。然后我上大学(如果不出去,8点又有法会 ...

是这样
发表于 2014-1-20 20:36 | 显示全部楼层
寒風蕩心塵 发表于 2014-1-20 20:24
青年派的奇幻漂流

我也是这种感觉
发表于 2014-1-20 20:40 | 显示全部楼层
blursky1058 发表于 2014-1-20 20:20
爱因斯坦的话,请看网络上的基督教的反驳
https://sites.google.com/site/voiceofgreengrass/-35


噢,我还以为中国人不知道呢。
是啊。老实说,佛教徒被这么骂作SB,是活该的!你虚构、不查证就引用,后果自负啊,没啥可说的。这不是基督教的错,是我们自己把脸凑上去求别人打嘛!如果我们虚构、不查证就引用,还口口声声说自己正信,不知反省,这不是很可悲的吗?完全就是自己在骗自己然后自我感觉良好而已嘛。佛教徒不要犯这样的错误!
前面我对永真说话好像很不礼貌,这确实为了他好(虽然他可能不是那么认为而我也不介意大家怎么看我。爱看看就是了)。外面的擂台残忍100倍。他这样出去,下场就是变猴子而已。宁可他在这里、佛教徒里面跌一次,学乖了,也不要在外面让佛教蒙羞、丢大脸。我提了很多他的致命伤。可是,不必说这么多,别人就只需要楸着他引用爱因斯坦这点(到了这种级别的低级错误,只需要一点,就足够对手把你耍猴子那样地尽情侮辱取乐了),强调他无耻造假、撒谎、妄语(他们不会说永真无耻造假、撒谎、妄语。他们说的会是佛教无耻造假、撒谎、妄语),他也只好当场哑口无言,被人左一巴掌右一巴掌地抽。
全世界都知道爱因斯坦没说这些话而佛教徒虚构,你还主动提出来邀请人来给你耳光。全世界都知道格鲁历史难说很和平很天使,你还主动提出来邀请人来给你耳光。这就是连基本功都还没有...还是那句话,没功夫,别学人上擂台!

发表于 2014-1-20 20:53 | 显示全部楼层
blursky1058 发表于 2014-1-20 20:20
爱因斯坦的话,请看网络上的基督教的反驳
https://sites.google.com/site/voiceofgreengrass/-35

不翻墙,似乎看到不到,我贴一下内容吧

佛教徒/界盗用爱因斯坦之名到处欺骗


常看到很多佛教徒在宣传或维护佛教时,提到有这样一段话是爱因斯坦说的,而事实上,这是一个骗人的谎言!因为有人做了认真的调查,得出结论,爱因斯坦根本就没说过这样的话。只是佛教徒/界虚弱到要靠这种盗名欺世的方法来为自己打气,真可悲!
佛界引用的话如下:

未来的宗教将是一种宇宙宗教。它将是一种超越人格化神,远离一切教条和神学的宗教。这种宗教,包容自然和精神两个方面,作为一个有意义的统一体,必定是建立在由对事物的——无论是精神,还是自然的——实践与体验而产生的宗教观念之上的,佛教符合这种特征。

调查的过程和结论如下:

Einstein and Buddhism: a widely-cited but spurious quotation


Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: It transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural and the spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity.

I've personally discussed the reliability of this quote with Einstein scholars (including John Stachel at Boston U, and founding editor of The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein), and with the authors of compilations of Einstein quotations (Thomas J. McFarlane, author of Buddha and Einstein: The Parallel Sayings and Alice Calaprice, author of The New Quotable Einstein) - none of whom cite it. The upshot is that neither they nor I know of any evidence that Einstein delivered a speech containing this quote.

Of course, anyone who had unearthed a reliable citation shouldn't hesitate to reinstate the quote - and to inform these scholars, all of whom would be delighted to know about it (as would I)! User:Robma 10:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I've moved this quote to a "Misattributed" section and worded a source line to avoid the talk page reference, but include the information presented here. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC) The second version of this statement (in the "Attributed" section) may be authentic: it is said to occur in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman (said by one reviewer to be "two of his closest colleagues in later life"), Princeton University Press, ISBN 0691023689 ; perhaps someone could verify/falsify? (I had tracked this down on the Web some time back, but I never actually verified it with the book.) I'm new at this, so I hope I'm posting correctly 12:33, 04 May 2006 (UTC) User: Dbrett[/url] Thanks for that source, I will look it up at the Boston Public Library. Ashibaka 22:38, 15 May 2006 (UTC) The word "Buddha" appears in that book once ("Our time is distinguished..."), but I read through it twice and did not see that quote. Ashibaka 23:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

出处:http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Albert_Einstein

还有一文为证:

To wit: There are two similar versions of a prominent Einstein quote on Buddhism floating around the web, reproducing themselves in viral fashion. They are:

Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: It transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural and the spiritual, and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity.
and:
The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism.

These quotes are rarely said to come from a particular book or speech, but we sometimes see this attribution:

Albert Einstein, The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press, 1954

Now, this book is subtitled New Glimpses From His Archives and is not by Einstein, so the quote may not actually be his, but someone quoting him or paraphrasing him, as pointed out on the E-Sangha discussion forums (see below for more on that). The two slightly different versions of the quote given above may lend support to that theory. But if so, this should be noted when the quotes are used. A Google Books search of The Human Side yields no hits for the word “Buddhism” but rather one and only one for “Buddha”:

So these quotes seem to be spurious. (Some pages of the book are omitted from Google’s preview, but the entire book seems to be searchable. As I haven’t read the book myself I admit the possibility that these quotes may lurk elsewhere in the work — if so, perhaps some intrepid searcher will at last unearth them.) There is much valuable discussion of this very issue on WikiQuote, the discussion forums of the Buddhist Society of Western Australia, and E-Sangha. (You need to be registered to view the E-Sangha boards.) Also look at Religious Tolerance’s comments on this issue.

If you Google these quotes, you’ll find they’re all over the place on sites devoted to Buddhism, Einstein, and science, from The Buddhist Blog to the Progressive Buddhism blog (which recently had a long back-and-forth about a spurious Buddha quote [make that "possibly spurious" -- see comment below] used by Paul Carus, author of the popular Gospel of Buddha.) A bogus Einsteinism also appeared in Tricycle promotional material several years back before the sagacious Kenneth Kraft set the record straight.

Bogus quotes reproduced on the web are a problem that comes up quite often. I think one of the candidates in this current, already exhausting Presidential election cycle got caught in a trap like this, and the more we rely on the web and neglect primary sources (and actual books), the more this will happen, and it may give us something much more pernicious than this Einstein issue.

So these quotes, interesting and entertaining as they are, should be shelved, or at least have the Einstein attribution removed, until someone can tell us from whence they originally came.

- Philip Ryan, Web Editor

出处:http://tricycleblog.wordpress.co ... quotes-on-buddhism/


佛教徒,别再到处欺骗人了!当一个宗教需要用欺骗的手法为自己遮掩打气时,它已是到了彻底堕落,丑态百出之际了!
发表于 2014-1-20 21:00 | 显示全部楼层
blursky1058 发表于 2014-1-20 20:53
不翻墙,似乎看到不到,我贴一下内容吧

佛教徒/界盗用爱因斯坦之名到处欺骗


这只是其中一些而已。英语世界有很多很多查证。
顺便一提,您给的这个资料出处,是佛教自己查证发现虚构的一篇(Tricycle是知名佛教杂志)。
如果我们对别的宗教也不懂,甚至对自己佛教里面的八卦也不知道(譬如佛教曾经虚构爱因斯坦什么什么而且早被拆穿),就别出来声称佛教如何厉害、别教如何不如佛教啦!这等于撒谎。而且应擂肯定死的很惨的啦!
发表于 2014-1-20 21:02 | 显示全部楼层
blursky1058 发表于 2014-1-20 20:53
佛教徒/界盗用爱因斯坦之名到处欺骗
这是一个骗人的谎言!
佛教徒/界虚弱到要靠这种盗名欺世的方法来为自己打气,真可悲!
佛教徒,别再到处欺骗人了!当一个宗教需要用欺骗的手法为自己遮掩打气时,它已是到了彻底堕落,丑态百出之际了!


永真自己看嘛。外面的世界就是这样。如果您前面那贴在外面世界贴,后果就是以上这样咯。所以,您以为我对您刻薄吗?比起外面,我多么温柔啊。可是,必须有人给您一巴掌让您知道自己傻。假设您在外面说您在这里说的话,5分钟都撑不住,所受的侮辱更甚百倍,而且还连累佛教。面对以上的攻击,您能怎么应对?(我这是讽刺语。不是真的在问您一个问题。这个不必问。局面您无法救,是死局!自己没本事,不做功课,没基本功,还和人掐架,死的活该!)
所以,也对听得进去的人建议:


  • 发表任何言论前,首先,第一步,check your facts。
  • 不懂的东西千万不要说,不要冒险死充,因为,永远会遇到对方真懂而叫板的情况。
  • 天外有天,千万别真把自己当回事。
  • 佛教是正信,也提倡正信...可是,不要轻易标榜自己个人就是正信、尊重事实。信我吧...我们自己个人一点都不正信,只是自己以为自己很正信而已。
  • 在自己功夫不是天下无敌的时候,不要对人说佛教天下无敌(虽然我也认为是),因为你没足够弹药支持自己的说法。
  • 如果非要应擂,遇到上述死局,必须平时就准备好要有可以反败为胜的“救命手”。如果你没有这个后备,那么,就等于根本没练过拳,那么打什么擂台呀?不是自己找死吗?
发表于 2014-1-20 21:06 | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 blursky1058 于 2014-1-20 21:08 编辑

是一基督教徒引述两个论据,其实一个佛教的文章(似乎是,wordpress是blog网站),来否定爱因斯坦的话,攻击佛教,手段不错。我们却是夜郎自大,嘿嘿
顺便提一下,好像西方的佛教徒实在啊,是就是是,不是就不是。确认事实,这个是基本态度啊
发表于 2014-1-20 21:17 | 显示全部楼层
对佛教徒而言,爱因斯坦再聪明,谁会认为他聪明得过释尊?对于基督徒来说,爱因斯坦会高于上帝吗?
谁跑到庙里/教堂里去跟佛教徒/基督徒说爱因斯坦信佛/上帝,你们也去信佛/上帝吧,人家肯定会认为说这话的人是个SB,客气的话一笑置之,不客气的直接轰出去了吧。
所以根本没必要拿任何一个名人来证明自己的信仰是正确的,别人是错误的,因为任何一个名人都不会超越任何宗教本身的信仰。
发表于 2014-1-20 21:29 | 显示全部楼层
blursky1058 发表于 2014-1-20 21:06
好像西方的佛教徒实在啊,是就是是,不是就不是。确认事实,这个是基本态度啊...



我一直在说我们必须有这样的态度。没人听明白。还以为我是反佛教。遇到这些情况,不能姑息,如果佛教徒不抢先给猪队友来一巴掌,争先揭露佛教徒造假,后果就是整体佛教被外人赏巴掌,而且还不能吭声,因为确实自己理亏。世界就是这样。
而,哪怕不从面对外面来说,就从我们自己来说,连什么是事实我们都分不清,也不关心,也不知道,也不重视;别人说什么,只要对自己观点有利,我们就不加查证地相信;被拆穿后,自尊心受损了,我们假装没发生过,去辩论别的点,对受辱一字不提;那么,不客气地说,请别再说自己正信/尊重事实了。你没资格!
发表于 2014-1-20 21:39 | 显示全部楼层
嘉江悲祥 发表于 2014-1-20 20:05
在印度庙里上过课?老大真的是什么都信过啊


说明一下。我前面没表达错误吧?我是被上课。我是学生。不是我为别人讲课。
发表于 2014-1-20 21:41 | 显示全部楼层
更桑嘉措 发表于 2014-1-20 21:17
根本没必要拿任何一个名人来证明自己的信仰是正确的

这是正解。不过,如果要这样做,请起码确保真的有这事,否则是自己丢脸,还祸及佛教,这责任我们担当得起不?
发表于 2014-1-20 21:57 | 显示全部楼层
上善如水 发表于 2014-1-20 21:41
这是正解。不过,如果要这样做,请起码确保真的有这事,否则是自己丢脸,还祸及佛教,这责任我们担当得起 ...

丢自己脸是小,让别人笑话整个佛教,那就罪无可赦咯,而且有时不单单是面子问题,如果因为个人SB行为导致别人放弃佛教这个信仰,那应该是有业的吧?
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册社区

本版积分规则

小黑屋|手机版|Archiver|格鲁教法集成

GMT+8, 2024-11-26 23:26 , Processed in 0.036672 second(s), 14 queries , Gzip On.

Powered by Discuz! X3.4

© 2001-2017 Comsenz Inc.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表