Re: Religion and ethnocentrism

Brian Michael Howell (bmhowell@ARTSCI.WUSTL.EDU)
Fri, 12 Apr 1996 13:38:40 -0500

Check my post again, please. I never said anything about Buddha being
"more historically accurate" (whatever that means). I was simply pointed
out that Buddhism, like Christianity, Islam, Judaism and many other
religions are based on the belief in an historical occurance and the
interpretation of that occurance rather than local or "traditional" beliefs.

On Thu, 11 Apr 1996, My Kingdom for A Phili Steak and Cheese wrote:

> ROFL ... and exactly how is the Buddha more historically accurate than the
> Christ? Hhmmm? Naughty, naughty the Dali Lama wouldn't agree ... his
> reverence would give value to both and has.
> At 04:33 PM 4/11/96 -0500, Brian Michael Howell wrote:
> >Of course. Buddhists (meaning orthodox Buddhism, not folk Buddhism,
> >which is a whole diff. thing) use the teachings of Buddha, an historical
> >figure, and his experience of enlightment as the basis of their
> >religion. While there is not a centrality to this event in the same way
> >as the history of Moses, Mohammed, or Jesus play in their respective
> >faiths, there is a belief that the teachings of buddha are true because
> >the Buddha was able to become a Buddha through those teachings. That is
> >why I qualified the historicity of belief in Buddhism.
> respectfully yours with some fava beans and a nice chianti, Anthony
> "It was a pretty big year for predators
> The marketplace was on a roll
> And the land of opportunity
> Spawned a whole new breed of men without souls
> This year, notoriety got all confused with fame
> And the devil is downhearted
> Because there's nothing left for him to claim ..."
> The Garden of Allah, 1995
> Don Henley, Stan Lynch, John Corey, and Paul Gurian