Since you intend to research, however, do consider this as an alternative perspective: religions (including Buddhism) are political and ideological, and deserve to be evaluated with the same critical eye that you might bring to -for example- the policies of your government. Not the tedious mahanayakes etc., which is obvious anyway -I’m referring to the ‘philosophy’ of Buddhism itself, the thing that you speak of as the perfect Buddhism that nobody follows. It has as many agendas and semantic flaws as your average headline article in the Island or the Daily News. When you say things like “Buddhism as a philosophy does encourage one to experience and discover things for oneself”, you’re repeating a propaganda headline without realising it.

And, I have doubted. A lot. I have questioned. It was through all this doubting and questioning that I have independently come to think that maybe Buddhist philosophy has some of the most plausible solutions. I am still not certain it is ‘the’ way, but it certainly seems the most rational and practical of all the ‘ways’ out there. I am still doubting and questioning, so I continue to read and absorb and seek. When and if I ever come to final conclusion, I’ll let you know.

“Buddhism encourages us to … doubt and to wonder and to go out there and discover it ourselves… and not follow blindly or unquestioningly.”

Buddhism *says* it does, but in truth, it does not. Buddhism lies, like any other religion, to suit its own agenda. Consider: what of Buddhism is being doubted today? On a daily basis, how many Buddhists doubt or question the theory or practice of Buddhism? Buddhism is built on conformity, like any other religion, except Buddhists are also expected to conform to the idea that they are intellectually curious doubters and questioners. A neat rhetorical trick, perhaps, but not much else besides.

For example, you believe in reincarnation. As sittingnut points out, reincarnation is unnecessary. It is a crass supernatural idea, alongside gods and fairies and so forth, and it has no relevance to Buddhist theory per se. That is, Buddhist ideas can be interpreted in the context of the real world (the world where people have only one life) and in my view, modern-day Buddhists would lose nothing (and gain much) in doing so. Then also, such an interpretation would have to adapt and correct many of the malformed ideas that surround the “reincarnation” concept, such as “karma”, “heaven”, “hell”, “sin”, “nirvana” and so forth. There is clearly enough intellectual work here for a generation or two of doubting, questioning, discovery-oriented young Buddhists. The dross of the last century of cobbled-together Buddhism could be cleared out, and perhaps a new Buddhism could emerge, one that could justify its claims to humanism and compassion.

And yet this has not happened, and is highly unlikely to happen. I can’t imagine Buddhists debating or considering even such a simple thing, because Buddhists are just as hidebound traditionalists as the members of any other religion.

You have doubted nothing, and questioned nothing. And therefore, of course, you are a perfect Buddhist.

SNUT and Electra, would you two marry each other eventually ?

The chemistry is undeniable and both of you are so into each other. oooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

SNUT and Electra
sitting on tree
kiss
first comes ring and
then comes suffering
kiss.

seriously, you two seem to follow each other quite a lot for two people who hate each other so much.

This is typical romance novel in the making.