Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Theravada Buddhism is the oldest extant version of the religion. I find it to be rather straight forward and specific with the goals of the teachings. It is all summarized in the Four Noble Truths. It lists the fundamental issue of suffering and how to resolve it. Much of the confusion is in religious terminology which obscures the fundamental ideas. The basis for the religion is based on ancient ideas such as cycles of rebirth, heavenly realms, extrasensory perception, etc., but for me personally none of that is required to derive value from it.

When you read the Mahayana (later versions) it stops making sense at a fundamental level, because the ancient Mahayana were pessimistic and did not believe you could actually resolve the issue of suffering in human timespans. It inherits the early texts, but downplays them with newer texts, themes, and ideas. It adds a worship element (Bodhisattvas). After several interpretations and cultural adaptations it becomes less comprehensible and more performative. Zen is an example, it operates on the principle that you cannot understand the content logically, so you need to perform the rituals (mediation, chanting, etc.) to get to the ground unadulterated truth. It is non-rational, partially because it integrates Taoism which cannot be grasped conceptually. This is mainly what makes Buddhism so confusing.

The same thing has occurred with Christianity. Started as a Jewish sect of Judaism, Gentiles introduced newer ideas, becomes Catholic Church, series of church schisms (Council of Nicea, East West Split), hundreds of years of commentaries, Martin Luther triggers Protestant Reformation, the Church adapts to new ideas and becomes less and less comprehensible. Pentecostalism is a example of how far this can go (speaking in tongues, faith healing, ordinances, snake handling, etc.).



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: