Now one may argue it is his intent, he knows but his audience doesn't so he chooses to apply terms and terminology that direct his audience to right practice.TMingyur wrote:I think that the conceptual contradiction is just shifted to another terminological level. But to shift the issue is not to explain it in a way that it is conceptually graspable. It is just replacing terms and terminology.retrofuturist wrote:Greetings TMingyur,I think that's best explained by the following sutta...TMingyur wrote:Why has he taught about hells and lower birth states resulting from wrongdoing? Fear mongering and fooling his audience?
MN 60: Apannaka Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
e.g. what is "the next world"? "Literally" or not?
Kind regards
But then ... it is said that he never says what is not true:
[1] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[2] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[3] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
[4] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[5] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[6] In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Kind regards