4 ms·

Siddhartha Gautama was a Hindu. His whole schtick was "why are the Gods incapable of eliminating suffering? I'll sit under this tree until I find out." </Oversi

Siddhartha Gautama was a Hindu. His whole schtick was "why are the Gods incapable of eliminating suffering? I'll sit under this tree until I find out." </Oversimplification> Definitely not an atheist. He merely believed, as most Buddhists traditions believe, that the gods are not relevant to acheiving Nirvana.

paradoxparalax 8y ago
That he was said or he said or someone said that because he could be Hindu(!) It has surely nothing to do with not being an Atheist. You speak like you were his good friend. Have you read all ""his"" writings? : (!) "Definitely not an atheist. He merely..." Again, too confident when saying something about someone who lived 2000 years ago...If it was about someone you knew personally, I would take it. Now I was confident too, and confidence is a two-edged sword(again!) , but your confidence, not adhominen, mind you, I say AdCommentum that, by how your Tone sounds, your confidence is bigger than mine. :And to conclude: What you call Hindu here? please clarify, because if you say that this is a Religion, I mean, If you are talking about hinduism, mind, ( off course when you said Hindu there you are not talking about he being born in India) So.There is a thing called Buddhism, and this thing is Not called Hinduism for some reason, so if buddha was something, he was Buddhist, So saying that he was Hindu to prove this point is unreasonable reasoning. Now forget about Hindu or Hinduism, If you are saying that the Buddhism Buddha Thinked(not the one people transformed in fairy tales) is not an Atheist, serious, Serious, philosophycal thinking, that thats what you are saying, because there is no Rigorous Scientifically proof of what you say, And to conclude the conclusion: We Cannot Read His Mind, even if he was alive.
- squirrelicus 8y ago
  ... slow down there turbo. I don't know what you think I said, but this kind of comment is not the kind that gets a response. Feel free to try again when you're feeling better.

paradoxparalax 8y ago

That he was said or he said or someone said that because he could be Hindu(!) It has surely nothing to do with not being an Atheist. You speak like you were his good friend. Have you read all ""his"" writings? : (!) "Definitely not an atheist. He merely..." Again, too confident when saying something about someone who lived 2000 years ago...If it was about someone you knew personally, I would take it. Now I was confident too, and confidence is a two-edged sword(again!) , but your confidence, not adhominen, mind you, I say AdCommentum that, by how your Tone sounds, your confidence is bigger than mine. :And to conclude: What you call Hindu here? please clarify, because if you say that this is a Religion, I mean, If you are talking about hinduism, mind, ( off course when you said Hindu there you are not talking about he being born in India) So.There is a thing called Buddhism, and this thing is Not called Hinduism for some reason, so if buddha was something, he was Buddhist, So saying that he was Hindu to prove this point is unreasonable reasoning. Now forget about Hindu or Hinduism, If you are saying that the Buddhism Buddha Thinked(not the one people transformed in fairy tales) is not an Atheist, serious, Serious, philosophycal thinking, that thats what you are saying, because there is no Rigorous Scientifically proof of what you say, And to conclude the conclusion: We Cannot Read His Mind, even if he was alive.

squirrelicus 8y ago
... slow down there turbo. I don't know what you think I said, but this kind of comment is not the kind that gets a response. Feel free to try again when you're feeling better.