[Naren]

Originally Posted by Mattayus

like most religions then really huh.
So, did Buddhists write the Matrix?

The Wachowski brothers who made the Matrix were really influenced by Hong Kong action movies, Japanese animation, and tried to put Buddhist ideas into the Matrix series. It's not true Buddhism though. It's like Hollywood Zen.

[Mattayus]

no fuckin way!

[Naren]

Originally Posted by Mattayus

no fuckin way!

If you ever watch any of the behind-the-scenes stuff on the Matrix, they mention a lot of the Hong Kong movies they're really into. They don't mention any of the Japanese animations they completely ripped off (just saying "yeah, they said that they wanted to turn this Japanese animation into a live action movie"). It's blatantly clear what animations they ripped off since they ripped off the style, the visual effects (the Matrix was only original in being the first to do that with real life. Japanese animation had done that bullet time stuff since the early 90s), the sunglasses, and even the ideas.

There have been tons of essays written on religion in the Matrix, the primarily influence being Buddhism. But, like I said, their Hollywoodized version of Zen.

[Mattayus]

that's amazing. i mean, i thought it may have had SOME ties, because it was very iconic in the way it's filmed etc, and there are really strong religious elements in the language they use, but had no idea it was that direct.

[TimothyLeary]

Originally Posted by Trespass

Anyhow, it is interesting to note the Buddha detested organized religion, and therefore I believe thats reason enough that Mahayana Buddhism (which is the most popular similiar sect of Buddhism comparable to mainsteam religions) is incorrect, as they idolize Buddhas and Bodhisattva's as gods and angels.

The Buddha, as I have read from a number of different sources and from speaking with my debout Buddhist friend, saw his teachings as more of philosophies of the world and the universe. His observation of the world and how it interacted around him lead him to discern his philosophies with logic and I suppose as close to scientific reasoning as you can get in fourth or fifth century.
.

I must agree with this. And it's very similar to what I think about buddhism.

[Naren]

Originally Posted by Trespass

Anyhow, it is interesting to note the Buddha detested organized religion, and therefore I believe thats reason enough that Mahayana Buddhism (which is the most popular similiar sect of Buddhism comparable to mainsteam religions) is incorrect, as they idolize Buddhas and Bodhisattva's as gods and angels.

The Buddha, as I have read from a number of different sources and from speaking with my debout Buddhist friend, saw his teachings as more of philosophies of the world and the universe. His observation of the world and how it interacted around him lead him to discern his philosophies with logic and I suppose as close to scientific reasoning as you can get in fourth or fifth century.

And here is the modernist's uninformed view of Buddhism. So many people nowadays talk about "organized religion" with this view of distain and believe that people 2000 years ago in India or Rome also viewed things the same as an American in the year 2008. You have to remember that these people did not view the world as someone in a first world country on the other side of the world 3000 years in the future. If you had been born in India in 400 or 500 BC, you would with 95% probably believe the same as them.

Siddhartha Guatama, sometimes known as "The Buddha," did NOT detest "organized religion." I have no idea where you got this idea. This sounds like he looked at Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, and a bunch of other religions and said "I hate these." But the truth is Christianity didn't exist yet. Islam didn't exist yet. He didn't know about the existence of Judaism. And he lived in a small part of India and spent a lot of his time in areas where he would come in contact with nothing but Hinduism. I seriously doubt he knew of any religions other than Hinduism. To the people of that time, Hinduism wasn't organized religion. Hell, it wasn't even a religion. It was reality to them. It was obvious fact.

The original version of Buddhism that he started takes place in the exact same world as Hinduism just like the original version of Christianity takes place in the same world as Judaism. The main difference is that Hinduism views reincarnation as an endless eternal cycle that you can't escape from. Siddhartha Guatama came to believe that one could leave the cycle and reach nirvana. Hindu priests had their own forms of meditation and Siddhartha tried all of them and supposedly he decided to sit under a tree for a few days and during that time, he reached enlightenment. Then, of course, he expanded on this and created a lot of beliefs that were unique to Buddhism, but they were not a stretch from Hindu thought.

Modern Buddhism and modern Hinduism are very different, but when it first started, they were basically the same system except with one believing that the cycle never ended and the other believing that you could leave the cycle through enlightenment. In another way, you could say that the only significant difference between early Christianity and Judaism is that one believed that the messiah had come and the other did not. Other than that, their traditions were the same. Their culture was the same. Their beliefs were the same. And their scriptures were the same. (The New Testament didn't come into normal usage until quite a bit later).

I can see calling Plato or Aristotle close to scientific reasoning, but if you think that "Shakyamuni" was using something close to scientific reasoning when he created Buddhism, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Out of all religions currently in existence, I would say that Buddhism is the farthest away from science.

[Mattayus]

Originally Posted by Naren

The original version of Buddhism that he started takes place in the exact same world as Hinduism just like the original version of Christianity takes place in the same world as Judaism. The main difference is that Hinduism views reincarnation as an endless eternal cycle that you can't escape from. Siddhartha Guatama came to believe that one could leave the cycle and reach nirvana. Hindu priests had their own forms of meditation and Siddhartha tried all of them and supposedly he decided to sit under a tree for a few days and during that time, he reached enlightenment. Then, of course, he expanded on this and created a lot of beliefs that were unique to Buddhism, but they were not a stretch from Hindu thought.

Modern Buddhism and modern Hinduism are very different, but when it first started, they were basically the same system except with one believing that the cycle never ended and the other believing that you could leave the cycle through enlightenment. In another way, you could say that the only significant difference between early Christianity and Judaism is that one believed that the messiah had come and the other did not. Other than that, their traditions were the same. Their culture was the same. Their beliefs were the same. And their scriptures were the same. (The New Testament didn't come into normal usage until quite a bit later).

Of course! i didn't think of it that way at first! but you have to think historically when approaching these matters, and remember that people weren't global like we are today