Clarification

[Dhammañāṇa Bhikkhu]

Censure is because they want others to ditto them.
I do not know if the people who praise it are wise or not. Evidently, they have not asked for evidence.
The ideas I follow are not mine. The brightest scientists of the world say that in the beginning there was nothing other than 'physical energy'.
From what we need refuge if we understand Buddha and the Noble Eight-fold path?
True, abandon Saddhā (in Hindi Shraddhā), think on your own, that is the way to 'samata' (equanimity).
That is what Buddha wanted. That is what he said in 'Kesamutti Sutta'.
I have long been a student of Buddha.

And, what did those bright scientists archive, good householder?

If one understands a little what Buddha and the Eightfold path means, that would give rise to Saddhā and go after it in trust, faith.

No, the Buddha suggested nobody to think his own way out, not did the Sublime Buddha suggested equanimity as the Sublime.

It's the first abound fetter, doubt, of one being a disciple, and Saddhā (surrender own ideas, and having a firm refuge) the basic evidence of a Noble disciple.

It's a broad "demo-cracy" sold idea of trade and for consume that the Sublime Buddha send anybody off into the jungle of defilements.

 

[Thomas]

You may see me putting traditions in contrast across the forums, this is because it's important to understand what each is really saying individually...

OK

Despite this I see within each an expression of oneness and this is where interfaith dialog can be more fruitful.

OK

I would like that the divisive aspects of each be dropped so that we can dive deeper into where each peak meets.

Who is going to determine what is divisive?

I hold that the traditions speak of a one-ness that transcends the world of forms, yet in those forms are the path to the formless.

I would suggest its not that the traditional forms are divisive, rather it's our short-sighted and self-serving reasoning.

Yet, as long as they are upheld there cannot be real peace, there just are reasons for conflict between them... this should not be overlooked.

Nor should the work of the peacemakers wgo speak across traditions without the need to abandon their content.

Trying to change the world from the bottom up, from the outside in, seems an endeavour destined to fail ...

I also rank traditions based on their effectiveness at expressing oneness, they are not all equal.

Debatable point. I'd say that's a subjective viewpoint?

All traditions, if they are authentic, flow from, and lead to, the One.

That one particular tradition might resonate more than another is to do with individual disposition.

I liked the reply from the Dalai Lama when a seeker said, "I have sought here and here, and here and here, and I am still searching," to which he replied something along the lines of, "I suggest you go back to where you started and look again, because if you cannot find it there, you will not fiind it anywhere."

This will not be appreciated by those who want interfaith dialog to ignore differences so we can pretend to get along.

I am much indebted to the Traditionalist movement of the last century, speakers for the Sophia Perennis, who do not ignore the differences, but who speak for their transcendent unity.