Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Which buddhist teachings may be incorrect?

havamarhavamar
edited February 2011 in Philosophy
As an exercise in critical thinking, which buddhist teachings do you think may be incorrect?

Comments

  • CloudCloud Veteran
    Define "incorrect".
  • VangelisVangelis
    Any teachings that do not have:

    Suffering.
    Cause of Suffering.
    Cessation of Suffering.
    The Eightfold Path to Perfection.
  • TheJourneyTheJourney
    ummm....couldn't they all be incorrect? How can you KNOW for 100% that something was correct?
  • havamarhavamar
    It really is not a trick question, or anything of the sort.

    Incorrect, as the opposite of correct. As per the dictionary definition:
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/correct

    "8. conforming to fact or truth; free from error; accurate: a correct answer. "

    An answer I would give for example would be the idea of rebirth. I think this may be incorrect as there is no 'individual' to be reborn.
  • TheJourneyTheJourney
    edited February 2011
    I'm not saying it like a trick question. Any of them could be wrong. You don't know, ultimately. Just cuz some guy said it doesn't mean it's right.
  • CamCam
    The Buddhist teachings that are incorrect from my view are the ones I have not put into practice and tested for myself. That's not to say that they may be wrong or right for you, however.
  • robotrobot Veteran
    The Buddhist teachings that are incorrect from my view are the ones I have not put into practice and tested for myself. That's not to say that they may be wrong or right for you, however.
    If you have not tried them out how do you know that they are incorrect?
  • CamCam
    edited February 2011
    The Buddhist teachings that are incorrect from my view are the ones I have not put into practice and tested for myself. That's not to say that they may be wrong or right for you, however.
    If you have not tried them out how do you know that they are incorrect?
    How do I know that they are correct - For me?

    My phrasing may have been a little rigid. My point is that unless I have tested and applied them in my own life, they hold no value or truth to me and my circumstances. For me, it's a process of learning and application; from application I form judgment. Perhaps that's not for everyone, but it's how I work. I like to test before I accept.
  • buddhajunkiebuddhajunkie
    hate to bring it up, but after the torrent of posts by the guy who is now banned, I suspect the Lotus Sutra is incorrect regarding the supposed incorrectness of the Pali Cannon. Sounds more like a power grab to me.
  • TheJourneyTheJourney
    It's not a power grab. The truth that was being said needed to be made clear. It doesn't undermine the truth that was said before it nor the truth that will be said after it.
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    edited February 2011
    When you ask which teachings MAY be incorrect - as an exercise in critical thinking – no teaching can be excluded at forehand.

    When I say this or that teaching is wrong (imho) that could be reason to discuss the exact meaning of that particular teaching. Maybe the teaching is not wrong but my understanding of it is?

    So this thread potentially opens discussions on each and every aspect of Buddhism.
    Maybe you want to narrow it down?
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    @zenff, Thought you were going to say you try not to think about it. :D
  • zenffzenff Veteran
    @cloud LOL :p
  • VincenziVincenzi Veteran
    the understading of anatta among contemporary buddhists.

    hint: materialism was proved as wrong view.
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    @havamar:
    had to check where this thread had been posted.
    good on you for making an appropriate and considered, deliberate decision. Thanks. :)
  • xabirxabir Veteran
    edited February 2011
    It really is not a trick question, or anything of the sort.

    Incorrect, as the opposite of correct. As per the dictionary definition:
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/correct

    "8. conforming to fact or truth; free from error; accurate: a correct answer. "

    An answer I would give for example would be the idea of rebirth. I think this may be incorrect as there is no 'individual' to be reborn.
    havamar, no offence, but your understanding of Buddhism is what is flawed and incorrect:

    Rebirth does not require an individual to be reborn, in the same way as 'hearing sounds', 'seeing scenery', 'thinking thoughts' does not need an individual in order to arise.

    If there is no agent/self/doer/thinker/hearer behind these phenomena, or a soul behind rebirth, how do these various experiences arise then? Via dependent origination, via the meeting of causes and conditions, via the aggregation of sense organs and objects, via karma/mental volition, via many many different kinds of conditions... which are all impersonal processes.

    Check this sutta out: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.012.than.html
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    Is there an option for: None are incorrect? :)
    My point is that unless I have tested and applied them in my own life, they hold no value or truth to me and my circumstances. For me, it's a process of learning and application; from application I form judgment. Perhaps that's not for everyone, but it's how I work. I like to test before I accept.
    If that is the case, then you can not yet say if they are correct. But you can't say they are incorrect either, yes? If one has yet to try them out, then the only logical conclusion is no conclusion.
    I'm not saying it like a trick question. Any of them could be wrong. You don't know, ultimately. Just cuz some guy said it doesn't mean it's right.
    That is true. However, if you go and test one thing and it's correct, and then another and it's correct, and then another and another and another, and those are correct too and keep doing that and keep getting the same result, you are left with a fairly high probability that the rest is also correct.

  • TheJourneyTheJourney

    That is true. However, if you go and test one thing and it's correct, and then another and it's correct, and then another and another and another, and those are correct too and keep doing that and keep getting the same result, you are left with a fairly high probability that the rest is also correct.

    But that's all your ever left with, is probability. Never certainty.
  • RogerRoger
    edited February 2011
    IMO? Any B. teaching (among the many schools) which describes the supernatural is incorrect. Why? Because the teaching will only be an approximation; human mind can't handle anything which lies beyond human experience. We may EXPERIENCE the supernatural but we can't communicate it nor explain it "correctly." That's the catch: no communication of it (to others) nor explaining it. LOL

    FWIW, That's how I accept reincarnation. It's a description of what we _think_ happens; there's SOME correctness to it but we won't know until we're doing it and then we "forget" all about it again because *newly-parceled* human mind can't handle it. :D

    I like it that way. :om:
  • RogerRoger
    edited February 2011


    But that's all your ever left with, is probability. Never certainty.
    Hummmmmm..., Uhhhhh..., maybe..., OK..., well..., no..., I mean yes..., Uhhh..., I'm not sure about that.

    :confused: :screwy: :thumbsup: :banghead: :scratch: :D
  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited February 2011
    @Roger, I think sorta like that. Generally in the absence of reason or evidence, I don't fall into belief. Additionally to that, people 2,500 years ago would describe things quite differently than we do now, and not be able to wrap their heads around certain things we may take as axioms in modern times, given the progression of scientific thought and our ability to understand the natural processes of our world/existence.

    So even if these supernatural aspects are true in some sense, their reality may be way off from how people back then described them. Plus their beliefs came about further back than that... they were held onto through clinging, and so we've no clue how far away their thoughts could be from ours today.
  • RogerRoger
    edited February 2011
    Additionally to that, people 2,500 years ago would describe things quite differently than we do now, and not be able to wrap their heads around certain things we may take as axioms in modern times. So even if these supernatural aspects are true in some sense, their reality may be way off from how people back then described them.
    .
    Ha! I love that thought! Thanks. Good point. It's just a matter of how people explain things and they get really attached to such things. I've seen some "Ancient Aliens" TV programs recently. How everybody in India knows UFOs and "star people" exist. Here in the USA we're confused about it. Claim their angels and gods were really just aliens and some religions get really mad. Some eastern religions accept such visitations as true. Thing is even the genuine aliens probably say the same thing, "You can experience the supernatural, you just can't communicate or explain it."

    :D:D:D

    I dunno. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm just trying to get more comfortable with not knowing. :)

  • CloudCloud Veteran
    edited February 2011
    Yeah I've watched a few eps of that Ancient Aliens show. I'm not all into UFOs and aliens and stuff without more evidence, but it would be insane to say there's not other life out there, considering how many stars/planets there must be. And reason would allow that, if we're a young galaxy (young solar system, young planet...) and other galaxies are older, their life may be much more advanced, right? So it would make sense if it turns out to be true that we're visited by, or were visited by, otherworldly life.

    Though I don't believe one way or the other, I'm completely open to what turns up. Wouldn't be surprised at all if it's true. :D
  • RogerRoger
    edited February 2011

    Though I don't believe one way or the other, I'm completely open to what turns up. Wouldn't be surprised at all if it's true. :D
    Yup, me too. Assuming they have the limitations of biology and physics advanced aliens will be pretty much just like us. Today we think ancient egyptians were different. My bet is you could take an ancient egyptian, give him/her a week of orientation classes (with ample rest periods) and s/he'd be thriving on facebook by the end of the month. Oops I did it again: We'd better stay on topic. :eek:
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran

    That is true. However, if you go and test one thing and it's correct, and then another and it's correct, and then another and another and another, and those are correct too and keep doing that and keep getting the same result, you are left with a fairly high probability that the rest is also correct.

    But that's all your ever left with, is probability. Never certainty.

    If that is true then the human being called Shakamuni did not have certainty about the things he taught about. I doubt that is the case.



  • RogerRoger
    edited February 2011


    If that is true then the human being called Shakamuni did not have certainty about the things he taught about. I doubt that is the case.
    Philosophically speaking, there are different kinds of certainty and truth. I forgot them from my college years. :D

    It is certain that if you stop drinking water you'll die. That's a certainty humans must follow, just like the lessons Buddha taught.

    OTOH, there is no certainty about how or why or what the supernatural works. The only thing we might do is experience it directly, we can never communicate nor explain it.

    There's more of my two cents :D Add them all up and they still equal two cents. :dunce:
  • newtechnewtech Veteran
    Hello:

    One nice thing about buddhism is that it doesnt allow ideas like: "nothing its good or bad", because its connected with a goal, to attain that goal, some things are incorrect, or highly inefficient.

    About the topic, i agree with Vangelis, any teaching that doesnt talk or its related to suffering.

    Personally i dont like teaching like the "eight Causes of earthquakes"




  • DaltheJigsawDaltheJigsaw Mountain View Veteran
    I'm not saying it like a trick question. Any of them could be wrong. You don't know, ultimately. Just cuz some guy said it doesn't mean it's right.
    Exactly!
  • NcryptxNcryptx
    edited February 2011
    Abhidharma (Mahasangika, Sautrantika, Theravada and Sarvastivada) theories of momentariness.
  • VincenziVincenzi Veteran
    some parts of the vinaya doesn't make any sense, in contrast with most of the pali tripitaka.
  • KartariKartari Explorer
    I'm not saying it like a trick question. Any of them could be wrong. You don't know, ultimately. Just cuz some guy said it doesn't mean it's right.
    Exactly!
    Kalama Sutta: The Buddha's Charter of Free Inquiry

    The criterion for rejection

    4. "It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.
    It seems the Buddha himself would agree. This is one of the reasons why I love Buddhism.
  • DaozenDaozen Veteran
    All of them. That's why you should try it and see.
Sign In or Register to comment.