Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Buddhism without Rebirth.- questions.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
In Pali, it is called 'slandering the Tathagatha'.
We should take care to not give thanks to slander.
it's kind of a long thread to search and I couldn't find your specific post.
But he did say believing in mundane right understanding is a safe bet or a sale gamble. He compared it to having a second throw of the dice.
Apannaka Sutta: A Safe Bet
:eek2:
there is a sutta (here) in which the buddha refuses to answer questions about 'self' to a certain wanderer
his rationale was if he confirmed the 'self', he would be inconsistant with his own teachings
if he denied the 'self' or taught 'not-self', the wanderer would misunderstand (due to his capacity) and this would lead to harm & confusion
so the buddha remained silent in this one instance
for many, the teaching of not-self is not suitable
:smilec:
This is just absoultely bizarre. One of the core Buddhist doctrines is anatta (not-self). I believe you are thinking of the view of "NO self." Please read the Ananda Sutta and then just about every other sutta in existence.
Not at all what i was refering to.
What an ego trip :-/
Again, not what I was refering to, and not what the link was refering to. I wonder whether you bothered reading it at all or just want to disagree with me :-/
I would, but I fear the wrath of DD.
For that reason I'm leaving this thread, before he accuses me of slander again.
Funny thing just happened. I used your highlighted quotation "paro loko" and looked it up in the Pali Text Society Dict that you referenced.
And I found this translation.
http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.2:1:1753.pali
Please read the highlighted text:
Para (adv. -- adj.) [fr. Idg. *per, *peri (cp. pari); Ved. para, parā, paraŋ; Lat. per through, Gr. <at>pe/ra & pe/ran</at> beyond; see Walde, Lat. Wtb. under per & also pari, pubba, pura, purāṇa] 1. (adv. & prep.) beyond, on the further side of (with abl. or loc.), over PvA 168 (para Gangāya, v. l. ˚āyaŋ). See in same meaning & application paraŋ, paro and parā & cp. cpds. like paraloka. -- 2. (adj.) para follows the pron. declension; cases: sg. nom. paro Sn 879, acc. paraŋ Sn 132, 185, gen. dat. parassa Sn 634; Pv <smallcaps>ii.</smallcaps>9<superscript>19</superscript>, instr. parena PvA 116, loc. paramhi Sn 634, and pare Pv <smallcaps>ii.</smallcaps>9<superscript>43</superscript>; pl. nom. pare Dh 6, acc. pare Dh 257; PvA 15, gen. dat. paresaŋ D <smallcaps>i.</smallcaps>3; Th 1, 743; J <smallcaps>i.</smallcaps>256; Sn 818, instr. parehi Sn 240, 255; PvA 17. -- Meanings: (a) beyond, i. e. "higher" in space (like Ved. para as opp. to avara lower), as well as "further" in time (i. e. future, to come, or also remote, past: see loc. pare under c.), freq. in phrase paro loko the world beyond, the world (i. e. life) to come, the beyond or future life (opp. ayaŋ loko)
I am no good at pali. What am I missing?
/Victor
Fast but incorrect!:)
This is the sutta I meant MN 22:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html
"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will stay just as it is for eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.
/Victor
Read how Deshy is using the concept not-self in her argument.
EDIT:
The translation of anatta is not not-self according to the Pali text society. It is rather unreality.
The 3 properties (tilakkhaṇaŋ) of existing things or of the phenomenal world are anicca, dukkha, anatta, or impermanence, suffering, unreality
/Victor
I was as you say I was simply seeking others views. I was not trying to adopt them. Neither was I in it from the begining to try and disprove it but my questions were to understand it.
This latest discussion where I have aired the inconsitencies I found was more or less forced upon me by you, DD and Deshy when I replied to armandos question and you would not let me express my view without questioning it.
Regards
/Victor
If Nibbana is not called truth then it is meaningless to call that which leads to it truth. Since the only reference is taken away.
/Victor
I am sorry for the small amounts of irony slowly seeping into my replis as some of you might have noticed. But it is due to me running low on patience lately. I will be back with a fresh sack tomorrow.
/Victor
Human, heavenly, hungry ghost, animal & hell world.
These are the result of action as mentioned in MN 117.
You are missing knowing about what you wish to argue about.
The other world or the next (future) world is the fruit of karma.
It is like you wish to argue amount the beauty of a certain woman and do not realise she has siphilis.
The 'next world' you are engrossed & infatuated with could be hell.
Water quenches thirst. Water is not the same as the feeling of being quenched.
Study leads to a degree. Study is not the same as a degree.
The same. Insight of truth leads to Nibbana. Insight is not the same as Nibbana.
No idea what V is babbling on about.
:buck:
Today you rob a bank, tommorrow you are in prison.
Or in the next ife, you a reborn as a beggar for your crime.
Action & fruit was what the Buddha was concerned with (rather than your emotional cravings for a next life without realising the consequences of karma).
Well done.
We have a new Buddha amongst us, namely, Victor.
2,500 years of Buddhism has been changed in the stroke of a pen.
:cheer::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::cheer::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:
:eek2:
try again, victor. From the pali text society's actual entry for anatta:
"**anattā (n. and predicative adj.) not a soul, without a soul. Most freq. in combn. with dukkha & anicca -- (1) as noun: S iii.141 (˚anupassin); iv.49; v.345 (˚saññin); A ii.52 = Ps ii.80 (anattani anattā; opp. to anattani attā, the opinion of the micchādiṭṭhigatā sattā); Dh 279; Ps ii.37, 45 sq. (˚anupassanā), 106 (yaŋ aniccañ ca dukkhañ ca taŋ anattā); DhA iii. 406 (˚lakkhaṇa). -- (2) as adj. (pred.): S iv.152 sq.; S iv.166; S iv.130 sq., 148 sq.; Vin i.13 = S iii.66 = Nd2 680 Q 1; S iii.20 sq.; 178 sq., 196 sq.; sabbe dhammā anattā Vin v.86; S iii.133; iv.28, 401."
A buddhist who denies not-self... Amazing.
http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/100409%20Pissing%20on%20Palaces.mp3
Tune in for more Victorious comedy tomorrow
Seriously folks, I don’t think continuing with this thread is of any use.
Thanks to all.
If you want to continue this dialogue, I suggest PMs would be just as effective.
Thanks.