Originally Posted by slikrapid
quote:
[you did talk about how if something cannot be proven it still can be used in a logical argument.]
an example: you can talk about how you feel, what you experience, think of, etc. but there is no way to prove any of it to others, yet you can still use it while forming own logical arguments
[he talked about how the Buddha never talked about God or Gods because he always based his arguments to convert people on things that they can verify.]
the aim of buddhism in general afaik is not to reach God, therefore any related topics are not examined beyond that limit (perhaps it is not possible to go further with the tools/methods of their choice, useful to reach a destination of their choice)
all things in (any kind of) existence can be verified, the question is whether he who verifies has the required capability to do so
[Unless you know more about spirituality than the Buddha...]
there are many other spiritually enlightened individuals that had different interpretations than the Buddha - its not about knowing more but rather about knowing things that you want to know or speaking of things that you want to speak about, that you're interested in, that have a special meaning to you - in addition to that, spirituality is not something limited like the materialistic world
[based on things we can prove]
an example: a car, a vehicle
you can only prove your perception of a car (which, you'll agree, is limited to the abilities of your senses), not the car itself
by using scientific instruments you can prove whatever values the instruments can provide, not the car itself
to be able to prove the car itself, one needs to have a complete insight into what this car is, with no questions (you might have about it) remaining unanswered to the degree of absolute certainty - such a degree is obviously not reachable on our current level of consciousness (of ordinary people)
[If we cannot, we will wait until they become verifiable with advances in tech or the next human evolution or whatever.]
that is floating (passive), not swimming or searching (active), right? (osho's '10 commandments' just for fun)
so why are we discussing anything since discussion is basically searching for answers or some additional understanding ;)
[If the Buddha can construct a whole spiritual paradigm with the knowledge of thousands of years ago only using arguments that are solid and verifiable, let's try to do the same]
it takes an enlightened individual (meaning: an individual experiencing a state of enlightenment) to reach such heights, so sufficient enlightenment is a necessary condition, whereas our levels of enlightenment (that of more or less ordinary people) are still rather modest in comparison
where we go from here is a matter of personal preference, some will choose a way close to the buddhist ideal (or ideals, depending on various schools or teachings thereof), others will choose closeness to another ideal,... but all of them, with no exceptions, will choose the right path for them, a personally ideal path
now, you may ask for proof of that last 'prophecy', however i can think of only two, three (or basically, only one proper proof): teachings of various spiritually enlightened individuals or such advanced scriptures (which speak of similar things), sufficient state of enlightenment (personal level reached) and closeness to the end of one's path or paths in the materialistic world (as one's destination comes closer)
theory of relativity in a spiritual sense? your own personal spiritual Truth is relative (related to) the path you want/desire to take (feel deeply connected to, hear the call of, long to achieve, of one's own heart's desire, what you have been searching for all your life,...) - no one else in the world will have the exact same path or experiences, so it is impossible to verify in the usual way by someone else, but such verification is not needed anyways as self-realization is the realization of one's own Self, not someone elses
