Amethystium - Ethereal

Lazy_eye wrote:Is there some slight disagreement here as to whether existence exists?

I bet it's a case where the term 'existence' as 'permanence' is being thought about & argued, where 'existence' as 'currently-steady-state' (what we might call 'change-while-standing') is all that it needs to mean.

1.d4 d5 2.b3 Nf6 3.Bb2 e6 4.a3 c5 5.e3 cxd4 6.exd4 Be7 7.c4 dxc4 8.Bxc4 O-O 9.Nf3 Ne4 10.Nbd2 Nxd2 11.Qxd2 Nc6 12.O-O a6 13.b4 b5 14.Be2 Bf6 15.Qd1 a5 16.Bxb5 Na7 17.Be2 axb4 18.axb4 Bb7 19.Ne5 Bxe5 20.dxe5 Nc6 21.Qxd8 Rfxd8 22.Rxa8 Bxa8 23.Bf3 Nxb4 24.Bxa8 Rxa8 25.Bc3 Nc6 26.Ra1 Rxa1+ 27.Bxa1 g6 28...

Most of the stuff you're hearing about is based on the Vipassana movement; this movement is a category within Buddhist meditation generally.

PSS: Actually this view that "dhammas" have no real essense has lead Mahayanists to a view, that there is no need to leave samsara, we just need to "cleanse" our view of it, and thus we'll find ourselves in nibbana (which is samsara in Buddha's view). From here > Eternal Buddha'...

I found the passage confusing -- it seems to set up existence as a real (if unappealing) thing that can be gotten rid of. It's not a thing, it's a state of affairs. Eternalism & annihilationism are related to Self-views, not to things existing and then ending. Suffering exists , for example (&q...

Of course; does this knowledge mean knowledge of paticcasamuppada but without grokking the mainline understanding of bhava? --- Is it just me, or do we indeed find many examples of the Buddha converting various other wanderers & brahmins, but not so much annihilationist wanderers? They were said...

So, an arahant is sitting there, looking at paticcasamuppada rolling along, without the ability to see past lives. The arahant is still sitting there, and looking on, without the ability to see beings re-arise in various ways. How can this be understood? Who knows what paticcasamuppada looks like t...

So, an arahant is sitting there, looking at paticcasamuppada rolling along, without the ability to see past lives. The arahant is still sitting there, and looking on, without the ability to see beings re-arise in various ways.

How can this be understood?

My thinking was that the arahant knows that the ending of dukkha has occurred, though the body may yet stand as a condition for unpleasant feeling. But that's only temporary, and when it ends there's just no more fuel around for such things, whether or not it would have happened. Maybe it's too thin...

For the sake of argument, let's say someone is agnostic about rebirth and they practice diligently and attain arahantship. Are they then still agnostic about rebirth? SN 12.70 applies here. It demonstrates that for some arahants (most? could it be... ALL of them?) the regularity of the Dhamma is se...

For documentaries there's also Our Daily Bread as well as Food, Inc. These may be better for the soft at heart.

So, to get around a rebirth-necessity in the case of a null bomb or a death doctor, begin from the foundation that agnosticism prevails in all cases of post-death assertions. This also removes post-death promises from being considered as primary goals since the Dhamma is unique in offering a 'here a...

You mean, how does nibbana resist the claim of being the same as this 'null bomb'?

...let's see, I'll sleep on it...

I'm somewhat underwhelmed; I'm not sure the distinctions being made actually exist, and there's just really vague phrasing in general that makes me want to sit them down and have a good chat about some basics.