Zom and TheY, I think the two of you might as well argue from opposite cliffs with a canyon in between you for eternity. It seems that you come from two very different cultures, with very different ways of thinking.Zom wrote: ↑Fri Nov 24, 2017 12:34 pmHow rudeCommentary already said, but you has not ability to read it, Zom.
However, I repeat, that information in the Commentary concerning 1st council and Abhidhamma is very dubious, strongly reminding mahayanic stories of "secret suttas" brought by Nagarjuna from Naga Realm ,)
If we take bare facts
Please consider the following quotation:
Zom, you come from a culture where the Scientific Revolution occurred and reshaped virtually everyone's way of thinking. TheY, I'm venturing a guess that you come from a culture that Harari would call "Premodern".“The Scientific Revolution has not been a revolution of knowledge. It has been above all a revolution of ignorance. The great discovery that launched the Scientific Revolution was the discovery that humans do not know the answers to their most important questions. Premodern traditions of knowledge such as Islam, Christianity, Buddhism and Confucianism asserted that everything that is important to know about the world was already known. The great gods, or the one almighty God, or the wise people of the past possessed all-encompassing wisdom, which they revealed to us in scriptures and oral traditions. Ordinary mortals gained knowledge by delving into these ancient texts and traditions and understanding them properly. It was inconceivable that the Bible, the Qur’an or the Vedas were missing out on a crucial secret of the universe – a secret that might yet be discovered by flesh-and-blood creatures.”
― Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind
As I see it, (and please correct me if I'm wrong) here is the crux of your impasse:
Zom, you feel you are entitled to bring any and all historical or linguistic or archaeological or what-have-you evidence to the table to make valid arguments (as would any Westerner, pretty much), but from TheY's point of view, those arguments could never add up to anything whatsoever. And why not? Because those arguments were not drawn internally from the Tipitika itself. Only arguments drawn internally from the Tipitika (which is to be interpreted literally and Fundamentally) have any validity. Those internal arguments ARE validity. And arguments external to the Tipitika are Fundamentally wrong.
Zom and TheY, have I represented your views correctly?