Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals

[morpheus]

menurut pandangan  bhante gimana, Buddhisme dimata org yg tidak intelek.

sori, jadi gatel dan pengen ikutan nimbrung...

kayak yg saya post dulu, manusia itu banyak aspeknya. ada aspek intelek, ada sosial, ada emosi, ada perasaan, ada mental, ada spiritual. kesalahkaprahan buddhis kebanyakan (terutama yg belajar skolah theravada) adalah menganggap dan menyamakan kemajuan praktek dhamma dengan intelektual. kalo orang banyak tau dan blajar teori2, tau istilah2 pali dan sebangsanya, itu dibilang sangar, hebat dan dasyat.

padahal pengetahuan intelek di sini, tidak lah berharga banyak. orang yg tau secara intelek, blom tentu mentalnya kuat, blom tentu perasaannya gak meletup2, blom tentu cerdas secara sosial, dan blom tentu cerdas secara spiritual. orang yg "tahu" secara intelektual, blom lah tentu "tahu" timbul tenggelamnya fenomena batin, blon tentu "tahu" dukkha yg ada di dalam dirinya sendiri, blon tentu "tahu" apa yg dimaksud "melepas".

seperti yg dikatakan morpheus: "there's a difference between knowing the path and walking the path". yg gak intelek ataupun gak banyak tau teori, jangan berkecil hati. mungkin saja anda sebenernya lebih "mengerti" dhamma ketimbang yg intelek 

bagi yg poor, yg gak cerdas, yg gak kaya, dengan belajar dhamma justru mereka bisa berpikir bahwa perbedaan cerdas dan bodo, kaya dan miskin tidaklah berarti banyak. sama2 manusia yg diombang-ambingken dukkha. nilai orang miskin tidaklah lebih rendah dari orang kaya. mereka seharusnya justru lebih pede...

[Kelana]

Saya selalu menolak jika intelek/kecerdasan selalu diidentikkan (sama) dengan pelajaran disekolah. Tidak ada manusia yang tidak intelek. Yang membedakan antar yang satu dengan yang lain adalah adanya kesempatan (yang ia ciptakan sendiri) dan bagaimana ia berusaha mengembangkannya.
Sekelihatan bodoh apapun manusia ia bisa memahami Dhamma asal adanya kesempatan dan bagaimana ia berusaha mengembangkannya. Tapi ingat bahwa ada orang-orang yang kelihatan bodoh tapi ia juga tetap tidak bisa memahami Dhamma karena ia tidak memiliki kesempatan dan tidak ada usaha mengembangkannya.

Membahas mengenai "Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals" dari Bhante Sri Dhammananda, saya tidak memandang kata "Intellectual" hanya sebagai 1 pengertian tunggal yaitu hanya cerdas akademik. Seperti yang kita baca, Mahatma Gandhi, Ven. Dr. W. Rahula, Dr. Ambedkar, Phra Khantipalo, Ven. A. Mahinda, Bishop Milman, memang mereka bisa baca tulis atau cerdas dalam akademik, tapi mereka juga memiliki kecerdasan yang lain.

Mencoba menanggapi pertanyaan Bhante Upaseno mengenai "How is Buddhism in the eyes of the poor?"
Saya menganggap "poor" di sini adalah miskin materi, karena saya melihat Bhante tidak menulis kata poor dalam tanda petik. Meskipun demikian setiap orang berbeda dalam memandang miskin materi ini. "That one is only poor only if they choose to be" – begitu kata Dolly Parton dalam lirik lagunya. So, saya bisa dikatakan miskin materi dibanding dengan Bill Gates. Tapi saya juga mungkin bisa dikatakan kaya oleh pengemis di luar sana.

Sesuai dengan semua pemahaman saya di atas bahwa intelek tidak identik dengan akademik, tidak ada manusia yang tidak intelek (termasuk orang miskin sekalipun), yang membedakan adalah kesempatan dan usaha mengembangkan intelek, dan masalah miskin harta, maka Buddhism in the eyes of the poor bisa dikatakan ada yang peduli ada yang tidak, ada yang mengatakan baik ada yang tidak. Salah satu orang miskin  yaitu saya (jika dibanding dengan Bill Gates) berkata: Buddhisme itu indah!
Pendapat orang miskin lainnya bisa kita lihat quote dari "Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals" di sana juga ada tokoh yang miskin materi. Bukankah begitu??

[Sumedho]

buddhisme menurut para "poor" / kurang mampu ?

kalo saya jadi orang miskin, buddhisme adalah excuse dan cara saya untuk mendapat kebahagiaan, karena kebahagiaan itu bukan materi
Buddhisme adalah salah satu cara dia mencapai kebahagiaan (karena kekurangan dia yang tidak bisa berbahagia secara materi)

Ada yg tidak bisa menerima kenyataan bahwa dia poor, masa sih kehidupan lampau berbuat kamma buruk atau kamma baiknya kurang ? si aku nya akan merasa dia penting dst2x. pasti kamma itu bohong dan tidak ada.

ini hanya salah dua dari sudut pandang dari si "poor", masih banyak sudut pandang versi lain ala "poor"

nanti deh sambung sudut pandang lainnya, yg lain ?

[Sumedho]

Buddhisme untuk orang yang non-intelek,

Sama lah, perbedaannya mereka tidak sekritis yang intelek. Pada ujungnya mereka yang menjalankan dengan benar akan melihat Dhamma

[Upaseno]

Agama apapun tidak akan sempurna untuk setiap orang.  Kebanyakan umat agama "mempromosikan" agama mereka dengan berbagai cara.  Karena akhir2 ini aja Science lagi booming, jadi promosinya pakai sudut pandang science.  Nanti jaman berkembang, pasti promosinya menurut perkembangan jaman itu.

Yang penting cocok dengan keadaan kita sekarang, uda cukup.

Capeee deeeehhhh...

[Reenzia]

Childish superstition: Einstein's letter makes view of religion relatively clear

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." So said Albert Einstein, and his famous aphorism has been the source of endless debate between believers and non-believers wanting to claim the greatest scientist of the 20th century as their own.

A little known letter written by him, however, may help to settle the argument - or at least provoke further controversy about his views.

Due to be auctioned this week in London after being in a private collection for more than 50 years, the document leaves no doubt that the theoretical physicist was no supporter of religious beliefs, which he regarded as "childish superstitions".

Einstein penned the letter on January 3 1954 to the philosopher Eric Gutkind who had sent him a copy of his book Choose Life: The Biblical Call to Revolt. The letter went on public sale a year later and has remained in private hands ever since.

In the letter, he states: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

Einstein, who was Jewish and who declined an offer to be the state of Israel's second president, also rejected the idea that the Jews are God's favoured people.

"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions. And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people. As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

The letter will go on sale at Bloomsbury Auctions in Mayfair on Thursday and is expected to fetch up to £8,000. The handwritten piece, in German, is not listed in the source material of the most authoritative academic text on the subject, Max Jammer's book Einstein and Religion.

One of the country's leading experts on the scientist, John Brooke of Oxford University, admitted he had not heard of it.

Einstein is best known for his theories of relativity and for the famous E=mc2 equation that describes the equivalence of mass and energy, but his thoughts on religion have long attracted conjecture.

His parents were not religious but he attended a Catholic primary school and at the same time received private tuition in Judaism. This prompted what he later called, his "religious paradise of youth", during which he observed religious rules such as not eating pork. This did not last long though and by 12 he was questioning the truth of many biblical stories.

"The consequence was a positively fanatic [orgy of] freethinking coupled with the impression that youth is being deceived by the state through lies; it was a crushing impression," he later wrote.

In his later years he referred to a "cosmic religious feeling" that permeated and sustained his scientific work. In 1954, a year before his death, he spoke of wishing to "experience the universe as a single cosmic whole". He was also fond of using religious flourishes, in 1926 declaring that "He [God] does not throw dice" when referring to randomness thrown up by quantum theory.

His position on God has been widely misrepresented by people on both sides of the atheism/religion divide but he always resisted easy stereotyping on the subject.

"Like other great scientists he does not fit the boxes in which popular polemicists like to pigeonhole him," said Brooke. "It is clear for example that he had respect for the religious values enshrined within Judaic and Christian traditions ... but what he understood by religion was something far more subtle than what is usually meant by the word in popular discussion."

Despite his categorical rejection of conventional religion, Brooke said that Einstein became angry when his views were appropriated by evangelists for atheism. He was offended by their lack of humility and once wrote. "The eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion

[hatRed]

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Tafsir saya dalam perkataan ini sih, bahwa diperlukan sciences dalam "melihat" suatu religi. tetapi religi tidaklah dibutuhkan banget dalam pemahaman sciences walau kebanyakan ide science lahir dari paham religi.

[hatRed]

Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals

"Sang Buddha sebenarnya tidak pernah mengajar, dia hanya memperlihatkan"

(hatRed, "orang iseng di DC")

Buddhism in the Eyes of UnIntellectuals

"Dhamma adalah kurikulum ku, Sang Buddha adalah guru ku, Tipitaka adalah buku ku"

(hatRed, "orang iseng di DC")

[Nevada]

Buddhism in the Eyes of Intellectuals

"Sang Buddha sebenarnya tidak pernah mengajar, dia hanya memperlihatkan"

(hatRed, "orang iseng di DC")

Buddhism in the Eyes of UnIntellectuals

"Dhamma adalah kurikulum ku, Sang Buddha adalah guru ku, Tipitaka adalah buku ku"

(hatRed, "orang iseng di DC")

[Reenzia]

In the letter, he states: "The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion

pengertian agama yg dimaksudkan olehnya mengenai "science without region is lame" bukan agama yg blind faith