--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Nich" <puthujjano@...> wrote:

> Dear Robert,
>
> > >
> As you bring this up again though, I'm bound to say that ten

mentions aren't

> a lot considering the size of the canon & could easily originate

from one

> part of a sutta which was reproduced in several other places.
>
> But my point was a general one about viewing these things from a

textually

> critical perspective in the hope that I'd elicit some replies from

those

> more knowledgeable than myself. (Which I'm glad to say it did.)
>
> What is a doctrine? Is Mt Meru a doctrine but the tradition that

the Buddha

> took a number of steps in each direction directly after birth &

issued his

> first declaration not? My question was about how these things are

decided

> for us by history, tradition & the happenstance of which texts

survive, or

> by us in our interpretation of that material, & that point is

cetainly not

> flippant, nich
> To put it more bluntly, the doctine of Jesus being the son of God

is well

> established, as is the doctrine

=========
Dear Nich,
I think people have many doubts about the Buddha's teachings. My
question was why you thought Mt. Meru might have come about through
an imaginative scribe. Is there evidence for this?
Last month on another group I had a discussion with a Buddhist who
wrote:
"A lifetime
of tinkering with

> one's own brain chemistry may cause some people to become

withdrawn,

> anti-social or even delusional. Arguably, the Buddha himself
> suffered from delusions such as possessing omniscience and
> superpowers, seeing all of his former "rebirths," visiting

alternate

> universes and meeting Devas.""

You see he disbelieves many parts of the Tipitaka but doesn't assume
that monks made it up, he thinks it was the Buddha who might have
been wrong.
Not sure what Jesus has to do with it?
Robertk