https://www.academia.edu/9226555/The_forest_hypothesis_forthcoming_ … (inspiration for @Jayarava post) shows Western academic Buddhist history is based on wishful thinking, not evidence.
-
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness I guess that depends on the situation. Growing up in a polarized area I learned that much of the history I was taught is bunk.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@eran When someone says "Mahayana says X" but only two scriptures out of hundreds say X, and only weakly—that's invention, not history.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness is the issue you're taking with calling it history or with the fabrication itself?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@eran and also (to a lesser degree) I think it's harmful in religious writing if it's not up-front.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness agree on both counts. Thanks for clarifying! Ps. A shoutout for bokononism and discordianism for being upfront about it!1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.