Continuing the book.

 “As is the case with all non-Christian religions, Buddhism lacks the epistemic environment to supply the a priori conditions for reason.” (P14)

This is a good example of the presuppositionalist approach in action.

This school of apologetics presupposes the reliability of the Bible as God’s word. From this comes a few things, namely that one cannot reason without the existence of God. God is “a priori” presupposed. The use of the term is different than most others would use the term by the acknowledgement of Cornelius Van Til (“Introduction to systematic theology” p 20).

This is where a lack of familiarity with the Pali Canon becomes a liability. The foundations of reasoning lie in paramattha dhamma, that is: the irreducible constituents of reality (the subject of anything about which one might reason).

And reasoning about those things must always proceed from sammaditthi, right view. The first step on the noble eightfold path that leads one, when practiced diligently, to the cessation of suffering.

“It teaches an anti-reason paradigm, and beyond that, is essentially illogical. According to Buddhism, all human experience is a mere illusion; and the world is rightly comprehended by antirational understanding because the world and all human experience are not real. This illusion must be affirmed to gain enlightenment. One must reject logic, truth, and reality to advance towards Nirvana.” (p14)

The same mistaken assumption persists here, and ironically enough, the point of Buddhism is to see things as they actually are.

He then quotes the blessed one (“I do not dispute with the world…”), but provides no citation (SN 22.94, remember "A monk whose mind is thus released does not take sides with anyone, does not dispute with anyone. He words things by means of what is said in the world but without grasping at it." ( MN 74).

he follows that with two apocryphal quotes.

“No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may. We ourselves must walk the path.” p15

and

“Peace comes from within. Do not seek it from without (Buddha).” P15.

Neither of these quotes appear anywhere in the Pali Canon.

The first has phrasing that isn’t recognizable to anything I’ve read, and seems to smash together two things. The first portion of it “No one saves us but ourselves. No one can and no one may” seems to resemble a sentiment expressed in several places.

Snp 773, "Having desire as their fetter, bound to the pleasures of existence, [people] are hard to release, [and] indeed

cannot be released by others..."

DN 16, "Strive for your own liberation with diligence."

While the second part can be found in a few places

Dhp 276: "You yourselves must strive; the Buddhas only point the way."

MN 107, “Even so, brahman, nibbana does exist, the way leading to nibbana exists and I exist as adviser. But some of my disciples, on being exhorted and instructed thus by me attain the unchanging goal — nibbana, some do not attain it. What can I, brahman, do in this matter? A shower of the way, brahman, is a Tathagata."

The second seems to resemble Snp 919, “Only within himself would he be at peace. A bhikkhu would not seek peace from another For one who as at peace within himself there is nothing taken up, how much less anything laid down.”

It’s useful to note that this portion of the fourth chapter of the Sutta Nipata sets the context in terms of the end of conceptual diversification rooted in the conceit of “I am.”

For more, please see the relevant texts in the library  (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B6Y59IH0xVyYcmxERlJsMGw3TUE?resourcekey=0-DTRgyj46R84FALqlF7FmFw)

He concludes the chapter with a statement that is closer to the canon than the previous two spurious quotations.

The author states, “…We have never had a religious movement like this in history…” p15

He’s right!

the Buddha himself originated this fact (eg, SN 12.65, 56.11, AN 5.202, etc).

“But Buddha prohibited his followers from calling themselves Buddhists.” P16

To be frank, I don’t know where this comes from. I’ve read all of the Pali Canon available in English, and I’ve never heard of anything like this. I do not think this author is fluent in that language and is referencing one of the few remaining untranslated texts.

The word “Buddhist” is a neologism, coined well more than two millennium after the Buddha’s unbinding. There are words that can be used in either Pali or translation for those who’ve gone forth or who remain at home.

Following this is a section on Nibbana and the noble truths that requires a deeper examination.

We’ll come to that soon.

May all beings be happy and free from suffering.