I don’t take Buddhists seriously… read it again. And as long as your are trying to be original, why not go back to Taoism? My ignorant little ratty friend.
I thought you were at least above the “No True Scotsman Fallacy.”
Anything original must be better than anything new? Is that what you are asserting now? Seriously ratty, quit being a dweeb. You know this shit,. You know better than to make such inane assertions.
We could go on for days about the superiority of the “Great Vehicle”; the “Prajnaparamita”; and the “Bodhisattva vow”.
But I will continue to rely on the simple recommendations of the original Buddha. There is suffering. Craving is the cause of suffering. An end to craving is an end to suffering. Such an end is found by following the Noble eightfold path.
Incidentally the last step on that path leads to “jhana” - a feature that Mahayana Buddhism has replaced with the mind numbing logic of “the theory of emptiness”.
“There is … no path, no wisdom, no attainment, and no non-attainment …”
“Anyone who accepts any truth from someone else has not yet found it within himself.”
You have not yet killed the Buddha.
Meditation is an obvious exercise of the ego, a deliberate, calculating way to gain an increase over a period of time. There are some who feel that more meditation results in more gain. It is another attempt to attain something despite the fact that there is no attainment.
You have lost your way in delusion little ratty.
The more I gain, the more I lose. The more I lose, the more I gain. Therefore, I gain all that I have lost, while losing all that I have gained, thereby achieving the balance within myself.
[FIRST JHANA]
"There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities — enters and remains in the first jhana: rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought and evaluation. He permeates and pervades, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal.
"Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman’s apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again and again with water, so that his ball of bath powder — saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within and without — would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates, suffuses and fills this very body with the rapture and pleasure born of withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture and pleasure born from withdrawal…
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.028.than.html
Original Hinayana Buddhism. Quite different than the advent of emptiness and it’s implications for the philosophy/religion
The biggest fundamental difference between Mahayana and Hinayana Buddhism is the workship of gods and goddesses. Mahayana workships the bodhisattvas , while Hinayana Buddhist think that Buddha was the human instead of God because Hinayana think that Buddha was simply a man who found a way to Nirvana.
In all my research of both traditions the difference is the Bodhisattva vow in Mahayana. Ie. the vow to not enter Nibbana before reaching absolute perfection in order to create a “Buddha Field” which will lead all sentient beings to Nibbana. Apart from the inherent contradictions - this is achieved by dwelling in Prajnaparamita (the perfection of wisdom - ie. Nagarjuna “emptiness”).
The Hinayana tradition follows “right concentration” - a part of the noble eightfold path. In fact the quote on jhana I provided is a snippet of “right concentration”. There are three further progressively refined jhanas apart from the first one.
Where did you get that quote? Or did you come up with that your self?
Yes you follow that “Right concentration” because all other concentration is wrong. HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA …
Okay, you can cite another difference and it is more important to you. Ha ha ha ha ha ha… changes not a thing.
It was woo woo nonsense, if that’s what you mean.
I disagree, for the reasons already stated in my previous post.
Leaving aside your assumptions about me, I don’t wish to relinquish all emotional attachment to wordy pleasures, as to me that would make my life meaningless.
That is a false equivalence fallacy, since in your appeal to authority you were assuming the expertise without offering any objective evidence either to support the claim or that what you were claiming he was an expert in was in fact real, whereas in the goal post shifting scenario you now present I would never make the unevidenced assumptions you suggest. So no I don’t invest trust in the credentials of strangers blindly, or make assumptions about their qualifications, just because they claim or appear to be qualified. Since that is an appeal to authority fallacy.
Qualified how exactly, what independent authority objectively validated these qualifications? Was his work peer reviewed, if so then offer a citation more robust than the gushing praise of his followers, as adherents of all religions make these exact same appeal to authority fallacies that you made in your original post.
Well I was using levity to make the point that your claim was woo woo. Unless you can offer objective evidence to support it?
How do you cling to the teachings of Buddha in one breath and teach the end of suffering in the next. Poor ignorant ratty. Horde that treasure as if it actually means something. Your mind is as free as a bird singing in a cage?
Your brain is what enables those perceptions, please offer objective evidence that you can experience anything independently of your physical brain.
You have contradicted yourself there, and again please demonstrate some objective evidence that anyone can experience anything independently of their human brain.
Yes but it is the side of the debate supported by objective evidence.Whereas your claims are not, not so far anyway.
I think you need to separate the respect people show you, from how they regard some of the things you post, and you never offered any evidence for any deity that I am aware of, but please by all means offer that now.
Whitefire is not man.
I shall leave Whitefire deal with that. She has been here for some time, and most people respect what she has to say. She has posted a great deal more on here than you, and most people here seem to agree with what she has to say, whereas most people here find your posts bizarre and unevidenced woo woo.
Sorry.
This is what you value? Happiness?? Nothing wrong with this - everyone has “values” and live their lives attaining them…
I just hope what you’ve chosen to do with the time YOU know you have, this life, has at the very least brought you “happiness”.
FYI - as a total outsider, with a bare minimum understanding of Buddhism… this is like reading an argument between Christians (like a born again fundie and a Jehovah’s Witness) - except COG understands it’s the brain 
and doesn’t buy into the magic …
YOU need the magical thinking surrounding this “religious” practice.
In case you’re wondering (I can tell you have some empathy) I prefer to value the quality of “peace”. It’s a mind-state I enjoy on a day to day basis. It will allow for happiness, pee inducing giggles, anger and irritation, sadness and self pity, - however, accepting these emotions as apart of me, as information, (writing this part brings me joy) I can maintain peace with the emotions and move through them in whatever amount of time I feel is necessary to experience them.
Edited to add: I’m an exJW btw and like most on here know their bibles and can “interpret” them based on whatever they’ve been exposed to or adopted as a thought process. Doesn’t make the bible real or it’s god real, just like you - doesn’t make what you believe real (only to you through your interpretation of what is happening or your interpretation of your experiences) - there is NADDA evidence that is convincing.
Changes nothing for you. Stubborn monkey.
I bet it is hard to keep your chakras in alignment when you’re a rat and have to drag your testicles on the ground.
It equates the intellect with perception. Pretty simple stuff.
I don’t have a photographic memory. If you expect me to care about “the reasons you already stated” then restate them.
Not really. The history of the Buddha prior to enlightenment is a story of his credentials. The manner by which he taught after enlightenment and the thousands of disciples who chose to follow him are also a mark of his credentials.
Was Pythagorus peer reviewed for his right triangle theory? Has it ever been proven wrong? It just happens to be right.
The Buddha marked a path which when followed let to certain outcomes. His disciples followed that path and reached the promised outcomes.
The Buddha rejected praise. He implored his disciples to listen to his teachings and follow the path.
For supernatural powers??! I’ve been here long enough to know how that process would go. No thank you. I am not going to argue that the attainment brings about supernatural abilities.
It isn’t a theory, it is a theorem. Theories can’t be proved; theorems have already been proved.
I have. Like the peace you mention, I regularly enjoy mind states such as joy and tranquility.
Sounds good smile 
I would never propose to teach a doctrine that would take that away from you.
I’ve worked with JDubs and they very quickly decide whether you’re a sheep or a goat. If you’re a goat they feel free to walk all over you. Walking away from that cult is a hard thing to do. Good on you for finding a way out. I hope you still are on good terms with your family (if they too belong to the organization).
Well. Thank you for the information. Sincerely. I did not know the difference until now.
However does the theorem need to show that right triangles exist in nature.
Is that not a basic premise that should be met?