As human wisdom, in the last analysis, Buddhism is a metaphysics of relation. I'm not considering the theological aspect here, should there be any to consider, because that is more akin to mythology, thus infantilism, with Buddha being born to his mother and an elephant, etc.In other words, Buddhism doesn't attain being. A poetic layer is then superimposed, quite a lovely one for that matter, which equates being and non being, and then you can go listen to a Tibetan gong for an eternity of immobile seconds.
That is what bothers me most in Buddhism, at least what I know of it, just the basics, it is the infantilism of its metaphysics. At the end of the day it is a philosophy of the absurd, something that places the spirit face to face with the absurd, and it is this absurdness which probes the spirit form which emerges the smile of Buddha... which should give one an irresistible urge to wipe it off!
Everything flows, everything is change... relation is illusion.
Actually, I prefer Indian metaphysics, at least there are two of them, like everywhere, one of being and one of relation, but there is one of being.
Posts
I don't understand what you mean by saying that Buddhism equals infantilism. It is in my opinion the most far reaching, logical and delicate thought system dealing with the ontology of reality that I have ever come across!
ReplyDeleteVivi-Mari,
ReplyDeleteOntology is being in the mind, not being. Buddhism turns its back to substance, letting itself be carried by logic. Anyways, luckily I have an answer to that question, but I have a couple words I still need confirmation for. Soon... :))
Ontology is actually the teaching about beingness, the essence of being, I'm sorry but you seem to have gotten it wrong. I'm sorry I have no idea what you're aiming for... I don't think they deny substance, just don't put it in the forefront.
ReplyDeleteVivi,Mari,
ReplyDeleteMetaphysics of being as being has been buried for a long time, because key points in Aristotles teachings were misunderstood by those who followed him.
How do you understand substance? This is an area of much confusion.
I love your blog, i will be back often.
ReplyDeleteA couple of years ago I read books on buddhism, the tao, early christian theology etc. I have to say that I think most relgions major prophets started out teaching a path of enlightenment (including Jesus) that got twisted by man for a need to control and explain away in their limited vision, what could not be seen by the human eye.