Talk:True Buddha School/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

This page only set the view from the believer This sect has been a debate

---

To "WangHaoDe": I would like you to read this article first: http://news.com.com/Wikipedia+and+the+nature+of+truth/2010-1025_3-5979331.html

WangHaoDe, you engaged in spreading defamatory information, just like in that article, when you wrote

• More likely this is a new cult founded by Lu Sheng-yen
• True facts on True Buddha School, and then linking to the shc site

First, it's obvious that you do not like True Buddha School. Sure, several Taiwanese groups charge that True Buddha School is a cult. So what? That proves nothing. It's just a bunch of groups that are engaging in slander, not something the Buddha taught his followers to do.

The shc site is so bogus. There are pictures of the inside of a True Buddha School temple. Guess what, those are all pictures of publicly accessible places, so anybody could go and take those photos. It just proves that she's been inside the temple. Big deal, so has numerous other people. Her criminal and civil cases were both dismissed by the local district attorney, so her claims are not credible. If you don't believe me, go check out the court records in Washington state's King County to see for yourself. In fact, this shc issue has been discussed several times on Talk:Lu Sheng-yen, including posts by shc herself and someone who knew her personally and saw what happened before she started her lies.

So since shc is full of lies, what possible reason could there be to bring it up? To damage the reputation of Sheng-yen Lu and True Buddha School, that's what the reason is.

Maybe you didn't know that her claims are all lies, but if so, why did you believe it? Probably because you don't like True Buddha School and Sheng-yen Lu, so you are all too-willing to believe something negative about them; so you spread this negativity to damage their reputation. Are you proud of yourself? Is this what Wang Hao De teaches you to do, to defame others? --165.247.103.94 04:50, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

---

This page is mainly from the point of view from its believer The comment

• More likely this is a new cult founded by Lu Sheng-yen

is based on a report from Montreal Religious Sites Project http://www.mrsp.mcgill.ca/reports/html/ChanHai/ This link was again deleted. Showing the biasedness

This scientific study has concluded: - Although identified as Vajrayana, the school is syncretic, involving Tibetan Mantras and music, Pure Land chanting patterns and beliefs, Japanese Shingon practices and Taoist disciplines such as geomancy and divination. -The recent and widespread occurrence of cults and sects in Chinese religions is testimony to the people's longing for material and spiritual salvation. Master Lu's True Buddha School philosophy is a response to those needs.

---

I just undid everything you wrote in. The report from Montreal Religious Sites Project is fine, I should have been more careful, but it belongs in the links section. In fact, that link is already on the page on Sheng-yen Lu. However, the report DOES NOT conclude that True Buddha School is a cult. Do you have trouble understanding English?

"The recent and widespread occurrence of cults and sects in Chinese religions is testimony to the people's longing for material and spiritual salvation."

That sentence basically means these groups serve people's desire for "material and spiritual salvation." That doesn't mean that every group that does this is a cult. The sentence said "cults and sects," not just "cults."

Just because something is syncretic does not make it a cult. It's like saying that because the ground is wet, it must have rained. That's not necessarily true: the water could have come from somewhere else, like a fire hydrant, a garden hose, an overflowing creek or river, melting snow or ice, and so on.

Did you bother to read the first sentence of this Wikipedia page? It says that the True Buddha School "is a Tantric Buddhist (or Vajrayana) school with influence from Sutrayana and Taoism." So your point is mentioned already!

I have now put the link to the report in the external link section. Are you happy now? If so, please kindly reply here that we've resolved the issues and then remove the neutrality dispute templates.

---

Ok no need to argue, to show that there is no biasedness I suggest a quote from the Montreal study: The study by Montreal Religous Sites Project concuded that: - Although identified as Vajrayana, the school is syncretic, involving Tibetan Mantras and music, Pure Land chanting patterns and beliefs, Japanese Shingon practices and Taoist disciplines such as geomancy and divination. -The recent and widespread occurrence of cults and sects in Chinese religions is testimony to the people's longing for material and spiritual salvation. Master Lu's True Buddha School philosophy is a response to those needs.

So no one can say there is no external reference and biased.

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:True Buddha School/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

Dear sir, I noticed the article on This School has been amended. It reads "The True Buddha School (真佛宗, Zhen Fo Zong) is a new Tantric Buddhist (or Vajrayana) sect with influence from Sutrayana and Taoism." I would ask that you check on the statement written. As far I am aware this school is not a recognised tradition in Vajrayana, or for that mattter, in any other buddhist tradition." I also refer to the article in Wiki on Lu Sheng Yan "Contorvery :After a meeting in November 1996 with the Dalai Lama, Lu asserted that the Dalai Lama had endorsed him as an authority in Tibetan Buddhism. This was rebutted by sources close to the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, who asserted that it was merely an individual meeting. His claims that he has millions of disciples has also been heavily questioned by Tibetan sources, as well as his claim to have attained lineage from various Tibetan lineages. The source also dismissed claims made by Lu that he had been afforded an audience of between 1500 and 2000 lamas upon a 1996 visit to Tibet and India. Since then, Tibetan monasteries have been advised to avoid contact with Lu, so as to diminish the possibility that they could be misrepresented for his own benefit.[9]" Thank you.

Last edited at 04:37, 16 October 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 16:01, 1 May 2016 (UTC)