Talk:Criticism of Buddhism

Highly incomplete coverage of topic (as of 3 Feb 2024) - needs updating or deletion

The page title is "Criticism of Buddhism", yet the only criticism given (as of 3 Feb 2024) is feminist criticism. The page also contains a link to "Women in Buddhism" which covers that approach in more depth and with more balance.

The "Criticism of Buddhism" page needs expansion to give comprehensive coverage of the multiple various viewpoints from which there has been criticism of Buddhism. Feminist criticism should be including as a heading for one viewpoint among them, some relevant information (more objective and balanced information than currently given) should be given under that heading, and the link to "Women in Buddhism" should be available for more detail.

At present (3 Feb 2024) the page "Criticism of Buddhism" is a redundant page in that the "Women in Buddhism" page gives better coverage of the entire contents of the "Criticism of Buddhism" page in its current form. Accordingly, unless the page is updated as set out in the above paragraph, it should be deleted. 2400:2650:3C42:8F00:5848:8184:327:3484 (talk) 07:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Karma and 'god and evil'

This edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Buddhism&curid=10510197&diff=1219861630&oldid=1219839265 proposes a number of objections to the doctrine of karma that strike me as overly simplistic.

• Atonement: you can't purge the karmic seeds sown by your actions through expressions of regret, or somehow making up for those actions with other actions.
• Proportionality: the idea that karma is like a set of scales, such that you can balance 'good' actions with 'bad' ones is from some kind of pop Buddhism. Each action sows its seeds independently; they don't somehow balance out.
• Death: I don't think it's true that death is considered the ultimate evil. Like suffering, it's just the reality of samsara.
• Free will: this is a preoccupation of Western philosophers, again based on a simplistic view of karma. Karma isn't supposed to be seen as deterministic. Rather, karmic traces are seen as predispositions.

The claims are not cited, so they are eligible for reversion; but my remarks above are equally uncited, so I'm not reverting. Does anyone have citations for the claims, that might put them in context? MrDemeanour (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, I don't have the book on hand, but it looks like the citation is supposed to be the Whitley Kaufman text mentioned in that paragraph. If someone who has the book can confirm or rebut the edit, we can take action. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 16:04, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

@MrDemeanour: Hi. I have made the citation above. User:HandThatFeeds is correct in saying that it is Whitley's source that criticized so. ときさき くるみ ^{not because they are easy, but because they are hard} 05:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Death is evil?

I strongly object to the passage which describes death as "the greatest evil in Buddhism". I've studied Buddhism for over two decades now and I have never seen death described as something evil. Death is inevitable for everyone, good or bad. 2603:8000:D401:6EC4:CC7:CEE0:B659:2211 (talk) 00:36, 1 November 2024 (UTC) Darwin

FYI:

[...] So even if one is moving up in the scale of karma to a very high birth for one's great virtue, one must still undergo death. This would appear to undermine the moral justification for (arguably) the greatest of evils, death itself. For in most versions of the theory death is not even taken as something that needs explaining, but is rather assumed as simply the causal process by which karma operates.

Whitley R. P. Kaufman, Karma, Rebirth, and the Problem of Evil

ときさき くるみ ^{not because they are easy, but because they are hard} 09:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)