> Another question: I have not read that particular book, but both you
and Robin both agreed that I don't
>understand Buddhism. What are you basing that assumption on?
Your earlier statements:
that Buddhism is causing suffering rather than relieving it; this would
in fact be a contradiction within the Buddhist system, as you rightly
point out, but at that point the Buddhists would simply cease practicing,
as they are not hypocrites.
That Buddhists retreat from the world, causing economic stress to their
societies; only for the preparation or learning stages do the Buddhists
retreat, pragmatically noticing that isolation is conducive to
contemplation. Later, however, after enlightenment particularly, you
should be able to meditate or contemplate "in the middle of the
Ginza"[downtown Tokyo business district, a maelstrom of noise and
lights].
That Buddhist countries are poor, suggesting that they are in some way
defective or backward; since capitalist success is not a Buddhist
principle, expecting them to be rich is inconsistent with logic. Would
you expect a capitalist country to lead the world in charity?
> BTW, if you can show me a deficiency in the objectivist axiomatic
system, I'd love to see it.
Richard has tried, and failed apparently so far; I tried in the post
before this one, and apparently failed. I'll try again.
IF there is a system which describes reality better than Objectivism, but
does not include Objectivist axioms in it, a (rigorous) Objectivist will
be unable to detect or agree with it. This is vaguely similar to Godel's
theorem of mathematics, which holds that there are statements that can be
made within a given mathematical system which cannot be proved or
disproved using the tenets of that mathematical system. The deficiency
will not lie WITHIN the objectivist axiomatic system; it will lie outside
of it, and be either undetectable or nonsensical within it.
By having axioms, it appears that limits are established on the system. I
do not recall reading of Buddhist axioms, only principles and practices
to show the quickest / most efficient methods to attain enlightenment or
minister to others. If you read books on Zen, you will find it has
(mainly) two schools of practice today. the Rinzai (named after one
master) which emphasizes sudden, drastic breakthrough into enlightenment
through koan study, and the Soto (named after another master), which
emphasizes a gentle "letting go" of incorrect concepts like Self, "I",
attachment, and so forth. Both are expected to result in the same
eventual state of enlightenment.
James Wright