Kris,
>So one you accept more readily because you believe it to likely be >allegorical, the other you reject because you believe it claims to be a >factual historical account? Surely you can see the irony in this. Belief has nothing to do with it. Whether Jesus or Buddha was a historical person,or not, makes no difference - the Buddhist teachings speak to me because they correspond to my experiences time after time. Christianity doesn't. Neither does Wicca or Scientology. That doesn't bother me. Does it bother you? >Every consider both/neither? Not particularly. If you see Jesus' life as having a meaning and a message parallel to Buddha's, then good for you. If you see them as being both equally bullshit, then good for you. >That it doesn't mater whether EITHER of >these are stories of actual/factual others or not - as they only point >selfless realization, and reintegration/embodiment? That they're only >expressions of the way, and are not offering anyone else's >stories/practices/promises as things to cling to or reject? People take >that upon themselves. yeah, ok. Mike
