Mr. G wrote: Fruitzilla wrote:
Mr. G wrote:
No. Traditional Buddhists. If anything, just Buddhists.
So, you're kind of insinuating that finding Stephen Batchelor inspirational makes you not a buddhist?
I'm not insinuating anything. I'm stating my opinion that a person who makes claims that rebirth and karma are irrelevant are Buddhist in name only.
There is a saying in Chinese "externalist wearing the dharma" (附法外道), which refers to someone who superficially appears to teach Buddhadharma or even identifies as a Buddhist, but in reality teaches false dharmas contrary to Buddhism.
Unfortunately, I suspect such teachers gain popularity partly due to the fact publishers print their material and it somehow vindicates their positions. To have it in a book or being discussed in a magazine makes it seem a lot more legitimate and worthy of consideration than just some yahoo on the internet posting their opinion for the world to hear.
If nobody published their writings, they would get almost no public attention. There would also be a lot of beginners less confused.
I'm not advocating censorship. Just identifying why these people get so much attention despite teaching outright false dharma.
I'm stating my opinion that a person who makes claims that rebirth and karma are irrelevant are Buddhist in name only.
Refuge in the Triple Gem makes you a Buddhist. If you have refuge in the Dharma, that means you accept the reality of rebirth and karma. If you reject either of the two or both, you don't really take refuge in the Dharma, hence you're not really a Buddhist.
Last night over tea I explained this situation of ours in the west to a Chinese monk and he lamented how sad it sounded.