15 December, 2017

Blog

My Kind Of Buddhism: No Prayers To Anyone

By Shyamon Jayasinghe –

Shyamon Jayasinghe

My kind of Buddhism isn’t anything dogmatic. It doesn’t consider the Buddha as omniscient. I study the Buddha, with whatever resources available, as I do study any great philosopher – Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Bertand Russel, Emmanuel  Kant or Ludwig Wittgenstein.

Space for Controversy in Buddhist Interpretation

In the case of both Buddhism and Christianity the authors or founders never left anything in written or coded form. In both instances, what we have in written form now are ‘memorised,’ accounts said to have been handed down from word of mouth through a coterie of close followers. The first Buddhist texts appear around 500 years after the Buddha’s passing away. Said renowned British Buddhist scholar, and founder of the London Buddhist Society, Christmas Humphreys (1951), “we, therefore, do not know what the Buddha taught, anymore than we know what Jesus taught.”

Today’s scholars would argue that Humphrey’s view is rather extreme since methodologies are available to ascertain somewhat the core teachings of the Buddha. On the other hand, the available space for controversy in the case of Buddhism is still significant and the grey and the dark patches do nag the honest finder. The consequence of this uncertainty is that we have today at least four schools of Buddhism, with subdivisions in each, proclaiming their view of what Buddhism really is. There is, in a sense, no one Buddhism but many Buddhisms.

Standing, as I do, on this marginal line of uncertainty gives me some liberty to speak out about my own preferred likings and leanings with regard to the bones of Buddhist doctrine.

Down-to-Earth Empirical Focus

What stands out in a distant view is that Buddhism was originally not a religion at all but a philosophy. It is a humanistic spiritual teaching that is  dominantly empirical. Buddha’s teaching is not top-down or derived from revelations by a divine being, a prophet, or a supernatural force. Buddhism starts from bottom-up. This means the Buddha observed and examined the objective reality of our lives as experienced by humans. He starts from natural, empirically observable phenomena out there, which we all can see and touch and smell and hear. He builds a metaphysic from there that explains all phenomena-natural and human- as arising out of a cause-effect nexus that he  named as ‘Paticca Samuppada,’ (Pali) or Dependent origination. This special doctrine of causality is inherent like a common thread throughout Buddhist teaching.

The principle is simply stated in the Majjima Nikaya thus:”When this is, that is; This arising, that arises; When this is not, that is not; This ceasing, that ceases.” Every event in nature, human life and every phenomena is explained as having being an outcome of certain given pre-conditions. There is no place for a first cause or uncaused cause in the Buddhist scheme of things. This being the case, there ins’t any role for supernatural forces or factors. Our own plight as humans are likewise explainable as having gotten an existence from the operation of preceding given factors-by  our own creation or by the creation of others. The fault, dear Brutus is not in our stars but in ourselves.

We are in Charge of Ourselves

I love this down-to-earth central focus of Buddhist teaching. Responsibility is within us and guidance is within us. This makes Buddhism a human-centric teaching. I love the shift away from the sky to the ground. On the other hand, in theistic religions we are enjoined to worship a supreme being and to be focused on such an outside spiritual entity. Muslims worship Allah five times a day at prescribed times. Christians and Jews are similarly sky-oriented  with arms outstretched toward an external God. From God everything begins and to God we go after death. Such religionists attribute both their good happenings and tragedies to God’s action. It is all God’s will or ‘inshalla.’ The Buddha fundamentally turned things around in order to make us understand a different reality and that is the reality that has natural explanations. One doesn’t have to worship or pray to any supernatural entity. The human being’s life shouldn’t be one of worship, according to Buddha. Buddha repudiated the theism of a prominent contemporary of his time, Makkhali Gosala. KN Jayatilleka states that in both Mahayana and Theravada traditions Buddhism rejects a personal God.

The very first step in the Noble eightfold Path to living is ‘right understanding” (Samma Ditti). All other steps follow from that correct comprehension of the reality we face where events happen as a result of the operation of naturalistic cause-effect processes. If one can explain events and phenomena through natural causes why posit a supernatural cause?

Buddhists Need not Worship any Being-Dead or Alive

It follows that Buddhists are not worshippers. They go to temple to respect the Buddha with Guru Bhakthi  and not to worship or to ask for favours from anybody. On the other hand, one observes a different application in most Buddhist temples. Many of these places of popular worship often resemble churches or mosques. This Buddhist religious practice contradicts the above empirical and naturalistic outlook of Buddhism. It is like reintroducing God through the backdoor. The practice of Buddha Pooja, where food is served at almsgiving to a Buddhist statue, is alien to Buddhist thinking. The assumption underlying such a practice is that Buddha is really present in person. This is basically a Hindu practice. Likewise, do I critically look at Bodhi Pooja where we pour water around a Bo tree, worship the tree, and even ask desperately for favours. The latter is a form of animism, which is a primitive attribution of a living soul to a plant.

The Puzzle of Rebirth and Samsaric Cycle

I find it hard to accommodate rebirth and the samsaric cycle within the above scheme of things. I prefer to believe, given the above freedom of interpretation, that the Buddha didn’t emphasise  this metaphysic of a life after this. He merely fell in line with a strongly prevailing  existing assumption. It a dominant ideology of the Vedic era. True, there were atheists and materialists during Buddha’s time but the latter were not taken seriously. The revolutionary and independent -spirited thinker who Buddha was did not question this prevalent belief. He merely modified the Upanishadic transmigration theory by asserting that there is no permanent substance like the soul (atma) that goes out of the dying body into another womb. Rebirth can occur without such a soul passing from one life to the next. The Buddha likened it to a candle that causes another candle to be lit. Rebirth is an  effect  of the last dying thought and not the continuity of a self through death.

To my mind, this itself is a hard notion to digest. Many issues arise that makes the belief unsustainable and devoid of sense-altogether. To me the operation of paticca samuppada is confined to the realm of our empirical experience and not beyond to another life. One cannot be said to be in charge of one’ s future if a karmic effect of the past extends to the next life.

Critical Sense of the Buddha

Such beliefs are also not in sync with the preponderant and impressive emphasis by Buddha of our need for critical analysis. The Buddha was the first thinker or philosopher to highlight mankind’s need for critical evaluation of propositions regarding reality that constantly bombard in the human mind-coming as they do from a range of multiple sources. In the world of today where media dominates competing for our attention such an inculcation nearly three thousand years ago is remarkable and vastly ahead of the times. The Vedic and Upanishadic world did not demand critical evaluation. They demanded only faith and unquestioned belief.  The Buddha enunciated the Kalama Sutta where we were asked to subject given beliefs to initial doubt and testing. We were enjoined not to accept  views on the basis that then latter have been propounded by highly reputed persons. Nor should we accept propositions on the grounds on internal consistency. “Test them yourself,” advised the Buddha. He even asked his followers not to accept what he has preached because he teaches but to first test their veracity and evidential support prior to accepting them. “When these teachings, followed out and put into practice, conduce to loss and  suffering-then reject them,” urged the Buddha in the same Sutta. That was extraordinary for a thinker of that era. The Western world had to wait until the 15th century to hear Rene Descartes, make a dramatic challenge  to our traditional certainties like that.

Buddha Wasn’t Omniscience

It follows logically form the above that the Buddha could not have claimed omniscience (knowledge of everything) or even final knowledge of anything. The Buddha of the Kalama Sutta could not have made a claim of thats sort. Our religious Buddhism practiced in Dhamma classes and temples tell us otherwise. It is distasteful to the modern mind that anybody can claim omniscience. Socrates famously said, “the more I know, the more I realise how little I know.” The modern scientist is essentially a doubter. He researches considerably before coming out with a theory. Even after a theory is announced the scientist keeps looking for subsequent controverting evidence. If he does find contradicting evidence he goes back to the drawing board and refashions his search.

The moment one accepts the Buddha’s omniscience one fashions Buddhism as a religion, where worship and ritual will follow. The Abrahamic religions-Christianity, Jewish, and Islam are derived form sources claimed to be omniscience and hundred per cent accurate. It is all there in the Holy Book of God and God is omniscience.

My kind of Buddhism isn’t anything dogmatic. It doesn’t consider the Buddha as omniscient. I study the Buddha, with whatever resources available, as I do study any great philosopher – Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Bertand Russel, Emmanuel  Kant or Ludwig Wittgenstein.

To be continued …

*The writer can be contacted at sjturaus@optusnet.com.au

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 1
    14

    Mr. Shyamon Jayasinghe: I have seen many times, people blame you, and now I say, [Edited out]. Lord Buddha has said buddhism is for intelligent people. Dumb people can not understand buddhism. Actually buddhism says that every human being needs to complete three things in order to be an wise individual. If they are born only with two factors they can not understand buddhism. In that sense I need to understand that you can not understand buddhism. FYI, Aristotle, like people were vert racist and considered women to be thrash too. I presume you have read buddhist books. Yet, you can not understand it. FURTHER TO THAT, BUDDHISTS DO NOT PRAY. I understand how could you be this dumb. [Edited out]

    • 6
      1

      Mr Shyamon Jayasinghe,

      Brilliant piece!
      ……………..
      Buddha is dead and can’t speak for himself.
      There are all sorts of crackpots who have never met Buddha 2500 years ago trying to tell us today what he actually said as if they were there with him. Hallucinatory stupidity is a mind-blowing thang!
      You understand Buddhism more than 99% of Buddhists; it’s real essence. And what Buddhism should be, even if Buddha is supposed to have – who really knows, no preset Buddhist was actually there – said or not. Buddha was a 2500 year old man interpreting a 2500 year old human-condition. You, a true latter-day disciple, has wheeled it into the 21st century. Don’t worry if the pre-historic mind doesn’t understand you, keep up the great work – it’s needed in Lanka more than you’ll ever know.
      ………………………………..
      To be fair, your bosom buddy Mr Sarath De Alwis has written some great pieces too, to put Buddhism in proper perspective in Lanka. And that type of work is sorely needed in SL right now.
      ……………………………………..

      But can’t say the same for your favourite Lankan of the moment …………. good ol’ Ranil …… wants to build the biggest stupa to bribe the Buddhists! Now, there’s a modern Buddhist who understand Buddhism the Lankan way!

      ……………………………………
      Would you have chosen Buddhism on your own as an adult if you were not born into it ………….. or introduced to it by your parents/ancestors?
      …………………………………..
      I am a strange dude that never buy anything that people sell me ………… and here’s the controversial part ……..
      I believe Buddha was a lonely guy who didn’t know enough hot gals – we men always find a way to blame the women fo our crap – to show him a good time ………. So were Jesus and Mohamed ……… when men are unhappy with life they go and establish religions/philosophies ………… women as the smarter humans know that life is buggered anyway ………… So the dearth of women establishing – or trying to establish – religions/philosophies.
      ………………………………..
      I am busy right now …………… but wait for my religion/philosophy ………………

      • 0
        5

        Hey dumb Nimal Fernando: All christians and rationalists may try to buddhism in it’s right place. there so many during the buddha’s time. Even Lord buddha’s own cousin Brother tried it. YOu can read buddhism very thorughly, yet you cannot understand buddhism properly. Because, you have to practice and understand it in it’s full prespective if you want to know buddhism. So, this – I read a english book, I can understand english and now I am a wise man type of scholars can not understand buddhism.

        • 4
          0

          Oh Jimmy, Jimmy, my brother from another mother – see pal, I, a non-believer, practicing Buddha’s teachings, am showing you Buddhist compassion. While you, just mouthing his teachings have given way to non-Buddhist/non-pacifist anger. See the contrast? Should there be any more proof to prove my point what crap present-day SL Buddhism is?

          …………..

          Just hold your horses buddy and don’t lose your marbles yet ……………. like I’ve said, I am going to come out with my very own religion/philosophy …………… it’ll be so good, you’ll be the first disciple; you possess the intrinsic intellect required! ………. I must make sure that the religion/philosophy dies with me; you are the right man for the task ……….. the way real Buddhism was a one-man religion/philosophy and died with Buddha ………… If Buddha really believed in his own teachings he would be horrified to see what Buddhism has turned into today, and made sure it died with him …………… and never went beyond his life.
          …………..

          Here’s a mental/thought experiment for you …………….. how many Lankan Buddhists would be Buddhists, if they were given a free choice as adults once their cognitive process has fully developed …. and were not just born – unknowingly led/forced by parents/adults – into it? Just think about it ……. that is, if you can think ………

          • 0
            1

            Dumb Nimal Fernando: I am saying dumb because, you are talking things you don’t know. that is how the christian/Catholic nature. Buddha was omniscient. buddha does not have to be here. buddha ahs mentioend that look at dhamma and you will see me (do you uunderstand that buddha doe snot have to be here). buddha can be understood to a certain extent only if you understand what buddha has told and How buddha behaved. —————-So don’t talk Crap. Your all are trying to be intellectuals actually when you are all braindead idiots.

            • 2
              0

              Ha Ha Ha You didn’t even see it coming did you? :))

              My intention was to expose the mentality of someone who calls himself a true Lankan Buddhist. And thinks all the other Buddhists are wrong.

              I don’t think you even realize what you fell into.

              Now Now no need for anger. Peace brother! Or should it be Maitriya?

              Out of Buddhist compassion, I rest my case.

    • 5
      0

      Jimmy oh jimmy,
      You shouldn’t drink so much Glyphosate dear.

      • 0
        1

        Old Codger: what are you catholi/christian ? YOu don’t know about Glyphosate and YOu don’t know about world religions.

        • 2
          0

          Jimmy,
          I am a Buddhist on Poya day, a Christian on Sunday, a Muslim on Friday, etc. I know how to control my mind like a true Buddhist without using mumbo-jumbo. I don’t hate anybody. I know some people hate themselves.

    • 5
      0

      Jimsofty,

      “Lord Buddha has said buddhism is for intelligent people. Dumb people can not understand buddhism.”

      Buddha, is not Lord nor God. He himself said that.

      Now I understand your frustration, your Bodhi Poojas and Pirith Nools, threads, are for naught. Don’t blame Mr. Shyamon Jayasinghe for that,

      Lord Buddha has said Buddhism is for intelligent people, and the problem Sri Lanka has is because of the Paras with a lower average IQ of 79, and many, including the Para-Sinhala “Buddhist” monks and the laymen who listen to them and follow them are equally not intelligent. So they do Bodhi Poojas, take a pot of water around a building, temple, housing a statue of Buddha, and pour the water to the roots of a bodhi tree, already saturated with water, for the tree to rot further.

      Want to know more about Sinhala “Buddhism”?

      Mahawamsa is an Insult to The Buddha.

      https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/mahavamsa-an-insult-to-the-buddha/

      In this “wonderland” called Sri Lanka, and in this day and age, one still comes across ‘academically’ educated, and supposedly intelligent ‘Buddhists’, but sadly lacking in wisdom, who reverently believe, that the Buddha walked out of his mother’s womb, and walked seven steps, while lotuses blossomed, under his feet!

      Jimsofty, read on, for your edification.

      • 0
        3

        Stupid Marakkaya, Amarasiri: You are correct buddha has told like that. but, we are wrtign herein english. English words can describe only the god. Pali,Sanakrit, sinhala and alsi I think most Asian languages can explain buddha, but not english. So, start thinking because you muslims are superficial and can not think.

  • 0
    13

    Shyamon Jayasinghe: Your article is based on reasoning (Rationalism). If so, what do you say about Theoretical Scoence subjects which are used today ? Do you know what I am talking ? What do you if we pray to the Anubudu Arahant Mahinda, if we pray to him ?

    • 3
      0

      Now, now, my dear Softy,
      You are of the track…, Arahant Mahinda was another disciple.
      “If so, what do you say about Theoretical Scoence subjects which are used today ? “
      To give you an idea about ‘Theoretical Science’, please watch this 20 minute educational video on you-tube. Good learning!.
      https://vimeo.com/2293696

    • 2
      0

      Idiots pray and wise men observe . that is the deference of jims and Shyamon.

  • 1
    12

    Anyway, It is good to hear that you understand buddhism in your own way.

    • 5
      0

      Jim Shitty.
      Freedom of speech have patience to tolerate.

      • 2
        1

        Baludasa: Bible is Fiction. IF you say I am WRONG, prove it wrong.

    • 6
      0

      Jimmy,
      Has something upset you? Did you take your pills?

      • 2
        0

        old codger,

        Jimmy is very upset that as per Shaymon Jayasinghe’s writings, if true or have some validity, Jimmy’s “investments” in Bodhi Pooja, Danas, Perith ceremonies, etc. will be for naught, carried out by the monks in the name of Buddha.

        It is the same feeling being cheated by a con artist and become a victim.

        Need to have empathy for Jimmy..

    • 2
      0

      Thanks Softy, I hope now you understand it as well. Even ‘The Enlightened One’ couldn’t make another human ‘Enlightened’. “Mano Pubbangama Dhamma” [All states are determined by mind], the first verse of the ‘Dammapada’. I am really happy to know that there is one more ‘Sekha individual’ among us and it is you, Shaymon Jayasinghe!. May you all be well, happy, peaceful and most of all, be free from worldly (Loukika) sufferings. Metta!

      • 0
        3

        Anonymous. I don’t know what BS you have wirrten. Enlightened one THE RIGHTLY AWAKENED ONE enlightened millions of devotees. those who do not know buddhism talk buddhism. the most stupid thing is that one not knowing that he is stupid. Now, there are not many enlighted one to be found the reason is the RIGHTLY AWAKENED ONE IS NO LONGER AMONG PEOPLE. mR. sHYAMON jAYASINGHE CONTINUES TO BELIEVE THAT IS WISE. One if he wants to be intelligent he should think that he doe snot know. Instead he thinks he knows everything. What a Bit#ch.

        • 1
          0

          “Anonymous. I don’t know what BS you have wirrten. Enlightened one THE RIGHTLY AWAKENED ONE enlightened millions of devotees”
          I am sorry to know that you are not wise enough to understand my ‘BS’ or Shyamen’s. ‘THE RIGHTLY AWAKENED ONE’ did not enlightened millions of devotees but showed them the path. I will stop replying to your comments from now on as you find them ‘BS’. Suwapath Wewa!

        • 1
          0

          jimmy dimmy what a f… u r- Buddhism is not a religion and why the f.. anyway must it be given a place in the constitution . These guys who don the yellow robe are a bunch of monkeys who will
          not be able to make it good on their own accomplishments. so what do they do, they steal from the poor masses food and other wants including pussy conning the ignorant. The word monk is not appropriate for these bald yellow human specimens as they have no right to profess being religious instructors and practitioners- they are supposedly only following a philosophy just like so many millions of people all over the world follow other philosophies to uplift their lives but do not bludge off the poor. Are you aware jmmy dimmy that the bo tree comes from the shit of birds that are dumped all over the place and in SL shrines are built to keep the yellow robed shits in business.

          • 0
            1

            Pal Joey th donkey, where di d you learn to bray ?

  • 1
    0

    Good thinking-original. Congrats

    • 0
      2

      How dumb.

  • 0
    2

    Shyamon Jayasinghe: What you have written here all is lies. You don’t know buddhism. YOu are just trying to show you know everything. According to Buddhism, at least you knew Buddha, and that would work for you.

  • 3
    0

    Shyamon Jayasinghe,

    RE: My Kind Of Buddhism: No Prayers To Anyone

    Thanks for a well-written article, what Buddha’s philosophy was all about. Do the Buddhists pray to Buddha to respect Buddha, or to seek protection from calamities and to ask for favors, like in the case of Bodhi Pooja? These needs go back to evolutionary history of Homo Sapiens and the fear they had of natural phenomena.

    In your article there are several things missing, because, if you look at the chronology from of the great philosophers – from Buddha, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, René Descartes, Bertrand Russel, Emmanuel Kant or Ludwig Wittgenstein, Bertrand Russel, there was a gap from 2nd Century BCE to 17th Century CE. What happened during those 1,800 years to philosophy, others, especially Islamic and Jewish Philosophers took a critical look at it from the Abrahamic viewpoint, as to the first cause.

    There was conflict, and great debate between the Islamic Philosophers, from 800 CE to 1,250 CE who generally took the view of Aristotle and the Theologians sought refuge in revelations. The debate centered around the First cause, and reason vs. revelations. The well known Islamic Philosophers were marginalized by the Theologians, Ulama, and they had the political backing of the rulers. Therefore, the Theologians prevailed, and Islamic Science and Philosophy declined, because revelation was above reason, whatever evidence was three to the contrary. .Just see what is happening in Saudi Arabia today.

    List of Muslim philosophers

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Muslim_philosophers

  • 3
    1

    Can you translate this article to Sinhalese please so that the 30,000 Buddhist monks in the country will read this article ?

  • 3
    1

    it is a pity that SL’s Buddhists call themselves Theravada but practice Mahayana and Hinduism
    I agree with most of what you have to say

  • 3
    0

    What does Jimsoftly smoke, I wonder? Pretty strong stuff, no doubt. It gets his mind, language and spelling mixed up. Undoubtedly his ability to stand up also gets impaired. He should market the stuff.

    • 0
      2

      It is stupid to write against Shyamon Jayasinghe. Becuse, he is not a learner. He is shoing off. that is how dumb people are. some times my keyboard plays tricks on me. I don’t know how. Only good thing is Shyamon Jayasinghe respects buddhism.Lord buddha did not leave buddhism even for monks to define. So, this rationalist can not make a dent there, except talking things he doe snot know.

  • 4
    0

    Mr. Jayasingha,
    “Buddhism a human-centric teaching. I love the shift away from the sky to the ground. On the other hand, in theistic religions we are enjoined to worship a supreme being and to be focused on such an outside spiritual entity. Muslims worship Allah five times a day at prescribed times. Christians and Jews are similarly sky-oriented “
    I couldn’t agree more with the above. In this age where we know the age, size (probably) and the mysteries of the Universe by practical inquiry, it is foolish to think that any Creator would be bothered about the activities of creatures who turned up only a million years ago on a planet which in size is less than a bacterium in comparison to the Universe.
    Even more stupid is to think that someone knew all this 2500 years ago.
    I am inclined to think there probably was a Creator, at least in regard to life. When you look at the workings of DNA,( which is much like a computer program) it is difficult to think how this could come about spontaneously. Maybe the ones praying to the sky have a point, though they are foolish to expect any attention!
    Buddhism is the most rational religion, but sadly it is not practiced in this country.

    • 1
      0

      Old Codger;-
      Buddhism has Become a religion in Sri Lanka, because The Majority needs Something/Someone to Look Up To! Otherwise they would all be Followers of Jesus, or Hinduism, Religions that promise an Easy Way to Salvation!

      Please Practise Maithri, and let them follow their Saviours, the Buddhist Monks, who are willing to give them what they Need. At least they still call themselves Buddhists, and at a Later stage may hear and understand some Dhamma, which will start them on their Journey toward Enlightenment.

  • 2
    0

    Shyamon Jayasinghe, You should forward this article to PM Ranil Wickramasinghe(your hero) and to president Maithripala Sirisena .

  • 2
    0

    Well composed piece Mr Jayasinghe. … Please continue to write further. You may want to listen to Dr Gamini Abey’s views and interpretations of the things you talk about. His views can be heard via Ytube.

    Buddha Pooja. I think Buddhists offer food,drinks etc to Buddha as a mark of gratitude before offering food etc to monks. This act may also establish a spiritual connection between those who offer such things and the historical figure Buddha.

    Bodhi Pooja is a completely different practice where it I.nvolves invoking the blessings of superior beings in Buddhist belief. I read somewhere that this practice was introduced to get Buddhists to temples. The question is whether it promotes blind faith while providing a serene atmosphere fir the devotee? People who are busy with secular life activities including in the commercial world, need a serene environment to take a break. Places likeGatambe, kalutara bodhiya provide such venue.

    • 0
      2

      Sirigamage: Read articles and books written by Catholics and christians. YOu will find more.

  • 0
    2

    Shyamon Jayasinghe: Read and understand Abhidhamma and see how eloquently it is explaiend. Today, modern scientists are lost in explaining the matter, energy and how it has made the universe. Classification is just a jumble. Yet, see how nice abhidhamma explains matter and energy, the make up the whole universe, consciousness factor and everything. today, noble laureate modern scientists think about how to include consciousness into science there is a book by Watson or Crick, the one from the US about consciousness, his Noble prize – presentation. While some quantum physicists are consulting Dalai Lama to see how they can explain the doulble-slit experiemnt. Do you understand any of these things. Anyway, what I told are now bit old stuff.

    • 2
      0

      Jimmy,
      “, see how nice abhidhamma explains matter and energy, the make up the whole universe,
      Does Abidhamma have anything about glyphosate and CKD?
      Please tell us dumb grass-eaters if you know. Please please!
      ” his Noble prize – presentation.”
      Is the Noble prize different from the “Nobel Prize”? Is it awarded by you?

      • 0
        2

        My spellings are wrong. big deal. My mother tongue is not english. you stupid idiots are the journalists in Sri lanka who just try to win by publishing lies and hatred.

        • 0
          0

          “My spellings are wrong”
          OK, that’s good for a start. Admit it when you are wrong. Always. Only then will we help you.
          See Dr. Rajasingham Narendran’s obituary? If you want to be remembered like that, start behaving now.

    • 1
      0

      Jim Softy:-
      Does Abhidhamma Teach Buddhists how to follow Gauthama Buddha’s Four Brahma Viharas; Meththa, Karuna, Muditha and Upekkha, which are the Fundamentals for leading a Buddhist Way of Life!
      I believe that Simple Villagers who follow these ‘FOUR’, will attain Nibbana, before all these Scholars who Master the Intricacies of Abhidhamma!

  • 0
    2

    This article is fantastic for christians/Catholic, as they say “the Stupid Almighty created everythng, who does not know anything other than the god created everything including the evil to screw him up”.

  • 1
    0

    Comparing enlightenment with a double PhD or triple PhD is ignorant. The other common ignorance is does not knowing of what is “understood or realized” in enlightenment. Is it about Astronomy, Astrophysics or Advanced Mathematics or Human Psychology or Biology or even mere logics or simple Philosophy or something else? What is the end of following a Philosophy or Theosophy and why do it? Does a man need something more than what is taught in the schools and universities to lead a serenity life? Is the religion or God is only for devotee (believer) or philosophical one? What is the minimum IQ or SAT or ACT or GMAT score is required for a man to knock on the door of almighty omniscience’ (Buddhist or Hindu) temple? (When Joel Osteen refused to open up his multimillion dollars Celebration Hall for Human shelter for Harvey victims, critics called it as it as a Tax shelter only building). Is the inextinguishable grace and devotions continuously flaring in the human heart bricked the beautiful walls of empire of religion or the fear and subordination imprisoned the him into the horror dungeon of religion? We understand the scientists’ inventive thoughts could not last beyond without being outdone for decades or the best bets for few centuries? Is that right to contend religious philosophical logics are out doing scientific logics and lasting for beyond millenniums and still worth to read and follow? Are these preaching are merely possessing anthropological or historical or literature material value?

    Who knows? But surely Shyamon Jayasinghe does sounds like he not.

  • 2
    0

    -continued.
    Once there was a man who found himself his eve sights had shrunk and cannot move or do anything himself. His wife accompanied him to go to an eye doctor. After checking his eyes, the doctor put a pair of glasses on the face of man and told “You should be fine now”. The eagerly awaited wife stood in front of him and asked him what he saw. The man struggled to see the transparent glasses sitting in front of his eyes started to describe it to the poor woman. He missed the adoring sight of his loving wife, the broad view of the bazars they travelled back from the from doctor, the magnificent sights of the landscape they lived.. so and so.
    Shyamon Jayasinghe started an essay to resolve the rampant effect of the Sinhala Buddhism in Lankawe and rehabilitate the ignorant majority crowd to make them get along with the other minority religions. Sad part on that is Shyamon Jayasinghe has fallen into the same pit he employed him to drain and save others. Shyamon Jayasinghe ended describing how magnificent his new glasses (“Shyamon Jayasinghe Buddhism”) look like instead of seeing the rainbow colors of the multi ethnic, multi religious groups surrounded him. His entire essay ended up how other religions are inferior to the “Shyamon Jayasinghe Buddhism”, including the Sinhala Buddhism. Because of that, Shyamon Jayasinghe did not attain any benefits out of struggling to comprehend the Buddha’s preaching anything more than the Sinhala Buddhists, other than their core racism.

  • 3
    0

    Thanks for reading my article. It was something that originally emerged out of my reflections. I have been wanting to express these views sometime and thanks CT for giving me space. I appreciate those like ‘Old Codger,’ and our erudite Professor of Sociology/Colombo, Siri Hettige, for their kind and useful comments. I also thank those who had different views-except those who have written irresponsibly.

    • 0
      2

      Shyamon Jayasinghe: Ablind explains the elephant and appriciates the cohorts. First talk once you study intensively. Otherwise disparaging and denigration.

  • 0
    0

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2/

  • 2
    0

    AMARASIRI. You always make some studied comments. Thanks

  • 2
    0

    shyaman Jayasinghe
    Can you any comments on crimes and persecution committed by Christians, Catholics and Islamists/ muslims in the name religion against humanity throughout past 2000 years of christianity and 1500 years of Islam. It is no coincidence that you chose only Buddhism for your rationalisation.
    Any one who questions the Koran anywhere in the world will me meted out the death sentence by the Imams.
    Tongue in the cheek is one thing. but to target Buddhism, the only peaceful religion in the history of the mankind, smacks of a more heinous agenda.

  • 2
    0

    A most enlightened analysis and a credible interpretation of a great teaching that, perhaps, lost its way in the hands and mouths of adoring but uncritical faithfuls.

  • 0
    0

    This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn’t abide by our Comment policy.For more detail see our Comment policy https://www.colombotelegraph.com/index.php/comments-policy-2/

  • 1
    0

    Buddhism is about investigating one’s own mind. Although Buddhist teachings were handed down verbally, the sutras that were written down in the Tripitaka can be understood collectively and they make a perfect sense – these teachings can be used to understand one’s own mind and to ultimately understand the “way things are” or to reach enlightenment.
    Additionally, although there are different schools of Buddhism, all of them have the common goal of ethical awareness, practising meditation, and developing wisdom to reach enlightenment. If you read the following article, you will understand this point clearly:
    Karunamuni, N., and Weerasekera, R. (2017). Theoretical Foundations to Guide Mindfulness Meditation: A Path to Wisdom. Current Psychology.

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.