Criticism of Nanananda, illusionism and Mahayana non-dualism

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
chownah
Posts: 9336
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Criticism of Nanananda, illusionism and Mahayana non-dualism

Post by chownah »

Sappurisa Sutta: A Person of Integrity
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
"Monks, a person endowed with these four qualities can be known as 'a person of no integrity.' Which four?

"There is the case where a person of no integrity, when unasked, reveals another person's bad points, to say nothing of when asked. Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of another person's bad points in full & in detail, without omission, without holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of no integrity.'

"Then again, a person of no integrity, when asked, does not reveal another person's good points, to say nothing of when unasked. Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of another person's good points not in full, not in detail, with omissions, holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of no integrity.'

"Then again, a person of no integrity, when asked, does not reveal his own bad points, to say nothing of when unasked. Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of his own bad points not in full, not in detail, with omissions, holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of no integrity.'

"Then again, a person of no integrity, when unasked, reveals his own good points, to say nothing of when asked. Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of his own good points in full & in detail, without omissions, without holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of no integrity.'

"Monks, a person endowed with these four qualities can be known as 'a person of no integrity.'

"Now, a person endowed with these four qualities can be known as 'a person of integrity.' Which four?

"There is the case where a person of integrity, when asked, does not reveal another person's bad points, to say nothing of when unasked. Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of another person's bad points not in full, not in detail, with omissions, holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of integrity.'

"Then again, a person of integrity, when unasked, reveals another person's good points, to say nothing of when asked. Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of another person's good points in full & in detail, without omissions, without holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of integrity.'

"Then again, a person of integrity, when unasked, reveals his own bad points, to say nothing of when asked. Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of his own bad points in full & in detail, without omissions, without holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of integrity.'

"Then again, a person of integrity, when asked, does not reveal his own good points, to say nothing of when unasked. Furthermore, when asked, when pressed with questions, he is one who speaks of his own good points not in full, not in detail, with omissions, holding back. Of this person you may know, 'This venerable one is a person of integrity.'

"Monks, a person endowed with these four qualities can be known as 'a person of integrity.'"
chownah
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27839
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Criticism of Nanananda, illusionism and Mahayana non-dualism

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,

:focus:

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: Criticism of Nanananda, illusionism and Mahayana non-dualism

Post by salayatananirodha »

Circle5 wrote: Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:47 pm I keep saying many famous monks have simply not read the nikayas. They just haven't read them, period. B.Dhammanando has a long post in the past explaining that indeed many famous monks simply have not read them. I have claimed many times in the past that Nanananda or Nanavira have only read the first sutta out of chapter 2 from SN, maybe a couple more from that chapter 2. They've never read a page of chapter 3 - the book of aggregates. I have caught them and their followers many times with the chicken in the bag and no matter what they say, I know they just haven't read that book of aggregates. They are not fooling anyone. It's like one would say the teach about Jesus in the biology book. Of course a person who has actually read the book will laugh about that. Reading the Book of Aggregates chapter is the thing that destroys any possible claims that these philosophies have anything to do with what the historical Buddha taught.
How would the venerable K.N.S.S.B. have compiled an anthology of Saṁyutta Nikāya without having read more than chapter 2?
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/wp-conte ... nikaya.pdf
:broke:
I host a sutta discussion via Zoom Sundays at 11AM Chicago time — message me if you are interested
Post Reply