Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Posts: 974
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 6:52 am
Location: San Francisco (The Mission) Ca USA

Re: Signature

Post by Prasadachitta » Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:57 am

These are the important constituents of a foundation.
My feeling is that a "foundation" is that teaching which sets off the progressively effective practice of the individual who hears it. Since paradigms of logic differ "Foundations" will differ. However even though they differ they must express the contingency of phenomena. Otherwise progressive efficacy becomes limited by our logical paradigm. :cookoo:

"Beautifully taught is the Lord's Dhamma, immediately apparent, timeless, of the nature of a personal invitation, progressive, to be attained by the wise, each for himself." Anguttara Nikaya V.332

Posts: 6310
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Signature

Post by chownah » Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:51 pm

tiltbillings wrote:The following is a signature of one of our fellow members:
To call something a foundation of the Buddhist Teachings is only correct if firstly, it is a principle which aims at the extinction of Dukkha and, secondly, it has a logic that one can see for oneself without having to believe others. These are the important constituents of a foundation.

Aj. Buddhadasa
It would seem that having to initially believe in what some other person said is unavoidable.
Seems to me that sometimes when someone says something a thought arises and we might then place some belief or faith in that thought.
A mundane example: When in college and not having enough money to finish my degree I was discussing my options with a friend and in the process of this discussion my friend off handedly said, "its too bad that money has to come into it at all"....this casual remark rang true to me that I need not let money be so important so I went out and took out a loan (which previously I really did not want to do) and thus did not let money worries rule a decision about my friend had not intended to send that message to me.....It is my view that I did not have to initially believe in what another had said.....what I did believe in was the idea which arose in me and had very little to do with what my friend had said.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests