--- In [email protected], "Richard J. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > jim_flanegin wrote: > > > > I'd like to hear your definition of Buddha. > > > > > > > Which Buddha? > > > > Any ol' Buddha. > > > The historical Buddha?
Beats me. I barely know anything about religion. not a strong interest of mine. > > > My logic was that to deny the existence of God while > > following someone who because of their perfected nature > > (what I would call their Divine nature) gave birth to a > > religion, didn't make sense to me. > > > Did Barry say that he was a follower of the historical Buddha? > > > Then after exploring what we meant by "God", I decided it > > wasn't the contradiction I had first thought, more an issue > > of perception and that being a completely personal thing, > > is not up for debate as far as I am concerned. Everyone > > perceives God differently, even those choosing not to believe > > in His/Her existence. > > > So, why do you suppose Barry insists on stating time after time that > he's a Buddhist who doesn't believe in God if it's not up for debate? I am saying I don't debate stuff like that. everyone's path is different right? > I'm simply pointing out that most Buddhists that I know believe in all > kinds of Gods and Bodhisatvas. I would hope so. > > By "beyond the range of human vision" the Buddha meant that there is a > transcendental state of conciousness that is beyond our ordinary range > of perception. > Yep.
