"The Questionable Boundaries Of Buddhism"

(Note:  Offering a book-marking summary till I am comfortably back on my feet, which is hopefully soon.)

Written from a near total lack of understanding.  Though – everyone! –

“When has that stopped me before?”

Okay.  Let the ignorance begin.

I like Buddhism, which Wikipedia says is the fourth most popular religion, so I apparently have company. 

Buddhists are calm.

They’re joyfully benign.

They say everyone’s equal.

Which sounds great.

If you’re a person.

But then there’s this “reincarnation” idea, where, if you do not behave admirably, you come back as a “lowlier species.”

Okay.  I have questions about that.

First:  Who drew that line between people and everything else, placing us “top of the heap”?

Two:   Who creates the “hierarchical ordering”?

Is worm “lowlier” than woodchuck? 

Is bird “loftier” than dung beetle?

Three:   What is the basis for the tallying direction on how far you “proceed”?

Is it like “Snakes and Ladders”?

“Thoughtless Behavior” – “Go down seven”?

“Generous Compliment” – “Up three”?

And while we’re at it, what of the unequal chances to “actively ascend”?

POISONOUS SNAKE:  “We have a limited range of ‘Positive Movement.’  ‘There’s a baby!’  We don’t bite it.  What does that buy us?”

SUB-HUMAN SPECIES: (Together)  “Plus, again, who exactly is making this up?”

SUB-HUMAN SPECIES  (with legal training in an earlier life):  “And is there possibility of appeal?”

Sure, Buddhists are vegetarians.  

Which clearly “softens the blow.”

But man!

You don’t walk on two feet, and to varying degrees –

You’re a punishment.

Where’s the “boundless compassion” in that?

(Or is this totally haywire?) 

(Offending millions of Buddhists for no reason.)