[Buddha-l] Bourgeois Buddhism

Margaret Gouin gouin.me at gmail.com
Wed Oct 5 00:47:14 MDT 2011

On 4 October 2011 18:44, Stefan Detrez <stefan.detrez at gmail.com> wrote:

> What I want is
> decisive proof and there's nothing wrong in setting up a definition. What
> if
> a lunatic claims he's Napoleon? IS he then Napoleon?
Stefan, even in the hardest of hard sciences there is no such thing as
'decisive proof', just stronger or weaker support for propositions.

'Setting up a definition' is rather like making a proposition:
IF person A claims to be a Buddhist,
THEN we should expect behaviour B

So what kinds of behaviour should we expect to see of someone who claims to
be a Buddhist? We can never base a definition on what they believe because
we can't know what they believe.

Margaret Gouin
Author, Tibetan Rituals of Death : Buddhist funerary

More information about the buddha-l mailing list