keep liberalism out of buddhism

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
dylanj
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:48 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by dylanj » Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:27 pm

SarathW wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:08 pm
I think this post should be posted in the politics forum, not in General Theravada.
Then we can avoid it if we do not want to participate.
if someone will move it that's ok
susukhaṁ vata nibbānaṁ,
sammā­sambud­dha­desitaṁ;
asokaṁ virajaṁ khemaṁ,
yattha dukkhaṁ nirujjhatī


Oh! extinction is so very blissful,
As taught by the One Rightly Self-Awakened:
Sorrowless, stainless, secure;
Where suffering all ceases


etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭi nissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṁ

This is peaceful, this is excellent, that is: the stilling of all preparations, the relinquishment of all attachments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation, extinction.

User avatar
Samana Johann 1
Posts: 91
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2018 12:03 pm
Location: Cambodia
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Samana Johann 1 » Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:42 pm

dylanj wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:27 pm
SarathW wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 10:08 pm
I think this post should be posted in the politics forum, not in General Theravada.
Then we can avoid it if we do not want to participate.
if someone will move it that's ok
Maybe a compost sub- forum might be well established to give those loving to stire up the left overs place to nurish, what do you think? Or to rename certain places and give then for free choseable additional membership. Just suggestions. It's not so that low nurishment should be destroyed but good if giving suggestions of which food is not just worlds dirt beings nurish to stay bound.
It's not clear if the possibility to take on form here is given, so also this post might be made on merely uncomfortable trust. Please don't be shy to make remark as well as to do what ever with the post you might be inspired to. Key is found here. May it be, how ever, understood as Dhamma-Dana toward the Sangha of Buddhas Savakas and those following them and not thought for any kind of trade or exchange for low purpose for the world. Feel also always welcome here.

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Thu Mar 15, 2018 5:51 am

dylan, "i'm pretty sure the buddha used male pronouns to refer to people at large as is reflected in the pali & to change that in the name of "female empowerment" is a mistake imho"

if you would explain the buddha using male pronouns to refer to people at large, especially in contrast to his using the neuter gender.
actually, we as forum goers (at large) may not know whether this page just assumed the buddha was using 'he' to refer to 'someone' or 'they' or if this is a deliberate re-translation; you would say you have seen other content that alludes to that, but i am trying to show u how this post looks. i wish you would work with the audience and not against
i have actually seen other websites that have used either 'one' or 'they'/'someone' or 'he'/'she'. i only just glanced at the google results. you are definitely right in some capacity about a tendency to revise the buddha's teachings in favor of something that can be called social justice, and it is vile and wicked etc.
here this has not been effectively demonstrated. you may say i am being pedantic, but many, many people may read this and for them it may reinforce ugly tendencies because you were only not thorough enough. 'women are fine' isnt really enough for skeptical people to see that you dont feel women are kept down in buddhism. you arent accountable for everyones views and reactions, but why not be more careful anyway

i move that the post is moved back out of the politics section because to have it in the section for politics is to validate the discussion of politics for politics' sake, which is not what dylan's post does.

calling [western] buddhism crap is uncalled for. it's amazing that it exists, and it didn't until about 150 years ago (correct/sources)?
also, the buddha did not say the dhamma was in a state of perfectly linear decline, is it not possible that the dhamma while in an overarching trend of decline may also incline at points. as faithful as you are, have even *more* faith in his dispensation. finally, please show your work from now on so others may either gain conviction by how well you argued or point out errors (you would care for this, no?) saying 'o well i might be wrong but i'll say anyway' isn't enough when you make sweeping condemnations
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:28 am

i dont think there are any female brahman priests, brahma has been said in sutta not to be possibly female, although in an agama parallel this is not said?
i personally and many others i bet would like to know the context of the verse. i think it is possible for someone to translate the verse in such a way blamelessly, and not only that but for another to translate it in such a way and be blameworthy.
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2300
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by DooDoot » Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:58 am

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:28 am
brahma has been said in sutta not to be possibly female
'Brahma', above, does not refer to 'brahmana'.
They understand: ‘It’s impossible for a woman to perform the role of Sakka, Māra, or Brahmā.

https://suttacentral.net/mn115/en/sujato
Brahman
neuter [cp. Vedic bráhman nt. prayer; nom. sg bráhma]

the supreme good; as a buddhistic term used in a sense different from the brahmanic (save in controversy with Brahmans); a state like that of Brahmā (or Brahman) AN.ii.184 (brahmappatta). In compounds brahma˚.

Vedic text, mystic formula prayer DN-a.i.244 (brahmaṃ aṇatī ti brāhmaṇo).

https://suttacentral.net/search?query=Brahm%C4%81
Brahmā
the god Brahmā chief of the gods, often represented as the creator of the Universe (vasavattī issaro kattā nimmātā) DN.i.18 DN.iii.30, also called Mahābrahmā

https://suttacentral.net/search?query=Brahm%C4%81
Brāhmaṇa
In the Buddhist terminology also used for a man leading a pure, sinless & ascetic life, often even syn. with arahant

https://suttacentral.net/define/br%C4%81hma%E1%B9%87a
Last edited by DooDoot on Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:12 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
No_Mind
Posts: 1911
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:12 pm
Location: India

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by No_Mind » Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:10 am

Here is something to end the confusion
Here the underlined vowels carry the Vedic Sanskrit udātta short pitch accent. It is usual to use an acute accent symbol for this purpose.[2]
In Vedic Sanskrit:-

Brahma (ब्रह्म) (nominative singular), brahman (ब्रह्मन्) (stem) (neuter[3] gender) means the Great Cosmic Spirit, from root brha
Brahmānda (ब्रह्माण्ड) (nominative singular), from stems brha (to expand) + anda (egg), means universe as an expansion of a cosmic egg (Hiranyagarbha) or the macrocosm. Brahmānda Purāṇa discusses cosmogenesis. Bhāgavata Purāṇa also discusses cosmogony and fundamental principles of material nature in detail.[4]
In later Sanskrit usage:-

Brahma (ब्रह्म) (nominative singular), brahman (stem) (neuter[3] gender) means the concept of the transcendent and immanent ultimate reality of the One Godhead or Supreme Cosmic Spirit in Hinduism; the concept is central to Hindu philosophy, especially Vedanta; this is discussed below. Also note that the word Brahman in this sense is exceptionally treated as masculine (see the Merrill-Webster Sanskrit Dictionary). It is called "the Brahman" in English. Brahm is another variant of Brahman.
Brahmā (ब्रह्मा) (nominative singlular), Brahman (ब्रह्मन्) (stem) (masculine gender), means the deity or deva Prajāpati Brahmā. He is one of the members of the Hindu trinity and associated with creation, but does not have a cult in present day India. This is because Brahmā, the creator-god, is long-lived but not eternal i.e. Brahmā gets absorbed back into Puruṣa at the end of an aeon and is born again at the beginning of a new kalpa.
One must not confuse these with:

A brāhmaņa (ब्राह्मण) (masculine, pronounced Template:IPA-sa),[5] is a prose commentary on the Vedic mantras—an integral part of the Vedic literature.
A brāhmaņa (ब्राह्मण) (masculine, same pronunciation as above), means priest; in this usage the word is usually rendered in English as "Brahmin". This usage is also found in the Atharva Veda. In neuter plural form, Brahmāņi. See Vedic priest
Since it is from hyperlinked text see http://www.hindupedia.com/en/Brahm

It also speaks about Brahmā in Buddhism
While "Brahmā" in Buddhist scripture, like Vedic scriptures, also refers to the non-eternal demigod, "Brāhma"[57] is believed by scholars to refer to the eternal perfect being, and the highest stage any person can achieve is labelled as Brahma. For example in addition to Buddha's Dharma being called "Astanga Marga"[58] and Dharmayāna, it is also addressed "Brahmayāna" because the aim is to lead one to perfection of Nirvāna. As the Samyutta Nikāya says,[59] "This Aryan eight-fold Way may be spoken of as Brahmayāna or as Dhammayāna.[60] Again the Buddha Dharma is equated with Brahma when" ...he has become dharma, he has become brahman." It is said that the cultivation of compassion in its purest form is "called the divine life in this world.[61]."[62] In this context Brahma is interpreted to mean divine. In the Suttanipāta, 656, the Buddha says that he who has won the three-fold lore[63] and who will never be reborn is Brahma.[64] Buddhism is compared to Brahma in other scriptures like the Majjhima Nikāya[65] where the Dharmachakra of wheel of law is also called the Brahmachakra.[66][67] The word Brahmachakra was nothing new and it was first mentioned in the Upanishads and it is believed the Buddha having received Vedic knowledge, used the term.[68] The Majjhima-Nikāya also says that the Buddha is 'Brahmapātta' or "one who has attained Brahman".[69], thus outlining that when Buddha became perfected by achieving Nirvāṇa he also became Brahma.

Of Nirvāṇa, the ultimate happiness it is written "one who has attained Nirvāṇa" it is said, "may justifiably employ theological terminology.[70][71]
This ought to be a a thread by itself

Short summary

A ) Brahmā or Brāhma - non eternal demi god responsible for initiating the beginning of universe (in Buddhism, the demi god in plane # 23 of 31 Planes)

B ) Brahman also called Para Brahman - highest Universal Principle, the ultimate reality in the universe. Now the complicated part - sometimes It maybe referred to as Brahma as in Maha Vakyas (great sentences) e.g brahma satyam jagan mithya / aham brahmāsmi / sarvam khalvidam brahma

How do we understand -- from the context. In Upanishads it is all about Brahman no matter what the spelling (also pronunciation)

C ) Brahman or Brahmana - the priestly class, also called a Brahmin (to make life easier)


:namaste:
Last edited by No_Mind on Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
I know one thing: that I know nothing

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:26 am

utilizable points
yes, doo doo please note again that the agama does not say brahma cant be female and i also did not mistake brahma with brahman
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2300
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by DooDoot » Thu Mar 15, 2018 11:10 am

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:26 am
doo doo
agama - late buddhism -
The Dīrgha Āgama ("Long Discourses," Cháng Ahánjīng 長阿含經 Taishō 1) corresponds to the Dīgha Nikāya of the Theravada school. A complete version of the Dīrgha Āgama of the Dharmaguptaka (法藏部) school was done by Buddhayaśas (佛陀耶舍) and Zhu Fonian (竺佛念) in the Late Qin dynasty (後秦), dated to 413 CE.

The Madhyama Āgama (traditional Chinese: 中阿含經 "Middle-length Discourses") corresponds to the Majjhima Nikāya of the Theravada school. A complete translation of the Madhyama Āgama of the Sarvāstivāda school was done by Saṃghadeva (Chinese: 僧伽提婆) in the Eastern Jin dynasty in 397-398 CE.

The Saṃyukta Āgama ("Connected Discourses", Zá Ahánjīng 雜阿含經 Taishō 2.99) corresponds to the Saṃyutta Nikāya of the Theravada school. A Chinese translation of the complete Saṃyukta Āgama of the Sarvāstivāda (說一切有部) school was done by Guṇabhadra (求那跋陀羅) in the Song state (宋), dated to 435-443 CE.

There is also an incomplete Chinese translation of the Saṃyukta Āgama (別譯雜阿含經 Taishō 100) of the Kāśyapīya (飲光部) school by an unknown translator, from around the Three Qin (三秦) period, 352-431 CE.

The Ekottara Āgama ("Numbered Discourses," Zēngyī Ahánjīng, 增壹阿含經 Taishō 125) corresponds to the Anguttara Nikāya of the Theravada school. A complete version of the Ekottara Āgama was translated by Dharmanandi (曇摩難提) of the Fu Qin state (苻秦), and edited by Gautama Saṃghadeva in 397–398 CE.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%80gama_(Buddhism)

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:38 pm

u dont like the digha nikaya either tho? :juggling:
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2300
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by DooDoot » Thu Mar 15, 2018 11:44 pm

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Thu Mar 15, 2018 7:38 pm
u dont like the digha nikaya either tho? :juggling:
The Dhamma is defined as follows in the suttas & as chanted in every Theravada monastery each morning & each evening (which excludes lots of the Digha Nikaya):
He/she is endowed with verified confidence in the Dhamma: 'The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One, to be seen here & now, without delay, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves.'
Yet you, as a newcomer to Buddhism, wish to defend the Digha Nikaya, when even the most mainstream scholars such as Bhikkhu Bodhi have raised concerns about it? I doubt it is wise to criticize people who simply help you. I also doubt becoming (bhava) a 'Buddhist fundamentalist' will help either. What you posted about 'Brahma' was a clear misunderstanding of the suttas. I acted to correct that misunderstanding for the benefit of all, including yourself.

The Agama appear to not be 'Early Buddhism'. Examining them will find this. The Agama are often errors of transmission & contain late ideas. Do you really expect texts that were translated into Chinese hundreds of years after the Buddha would be accurate?

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:47 am

because i havent seen a real argument about why any part of the digha nikaya is inauthentic. what i have seen is people dont like what it has to say and so reject it
and its an early buddhist texts which deflates your argument about the agama not being early. no it was not a clear misunderstanding and quit being an asshole
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 2300
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by DooDoot » Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:54 am

Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:47 am
because i havent seen a real argument about why any part of the digha nikaya is inauthentic....
I posted a real argument, as follows:
The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One, to be seen here & now, without delay, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves.'
So you want to argue with fundamentalists Xtians that the unverifiable Genesis is false but the unverifiable DN 27 is true? :roll:
Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:47 am
its an early buddhist texts which deflates your argument about the agama not being early.
I posted from Wikipedia that Agama were translated 800 to 900 years after Buddha. Can you provide a different scholarly view? Thanks

Since sutta says Lord Brahma cannot be a man and Agama is silent, the Agama cannot be an accurate transmission of the Pali.
Dhammarakkhito wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 3:47 am
no it was not a clear misunderstanding and quit being an asshole
I am not being an asshole, newbie. In rectifying your newbie error about Brahma vs brahmana I was not being an asshole. The Buddha said:
And how do students engage with the teacher in friendliness and not in opposition? There is the case where a teacher teaches the Dhamma to his students sympathetically, seeking their well-being, out of sympathy: 'This is for your well-being; this is for your happiness.' His disciples listen, lend ear, & apply their minds to gnosis. Not turning aside, they don't stray from the Teacher's message. This is how students engage with the teacher as friends and not as opponents.

MN 122

User avatar
Dhammarakkhito
Posts: 1115
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:31 am
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by Dhammarakkhito » Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:38 am

you have a reading comprehension problem. i never conflated brahma and brahmana and while you were trying to benefit people by correcting that perceived mistake you grasped at it as a mistake and with a more careful reading of my post, not grasping for a mistake, you would see that
done pointing that out

knowledge of the modes and details of past lives is verifiable thru meditation and besides matters that arent immediately verifiable can be taken on faith. i didnt say anything about the bible you grasped at the agama being late while you reject an early text, so it doesnt really matter if you think a text is late or early and it appears you are so transparent in your grasping and your deflections
i wasnt really making an argument it was more like prompting a discussion which is quite normal for humans
and its actually unfortunate for you to believe newness is that pertinent. not interested in academics or debates
"Just as the ocean has a single taste — that of salt — in the same way, this Dhamma-Vinaya has a single taste: that of release."
— Ud 5.5

https://www.facebook.com/noblebuddhadha ... 34/?type=3

http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://sites.google.com/site/santipada ... allytaught

binocular
Posts: 5453
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by binocular » Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:59 am

dylanj wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:00 am
the suffering of women would be more alleviated by them accepting that society forces them into a submissive role by & large as opposed to trying to change the whole darn world
It's not clear how my suffering as a woman would be alleviated if I would "accept that society forces me into a submissive role".
Can you explain?

User avatar
dylanj
Posts: 784
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:48 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: keep liberalism out of buddhism

Post by dylanj » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:06 pm

binocular wrote:
Fri Mar 16, 2018 11:59 am
dylanj wrote:
Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:00 am
the suffering of women would be more alleviated by them accepting that society forces them into a submissive role by & large as opposed to trying to change the whole darn world
It's not clear how my suffering as a woman would be alleviated if I would "accept that society forces me into a submissive role".
Can you explain?
well given that you don't already accept it, of course; in such a case accepting it would relieve you of the pain of feeling oppressed
susukhaṁ vata nibbānaṁ,
sammā­sambud­dha­desitaṁ;
asokaṁ virajaṁ khemaṁ,
yattha dukkhaṁ nirujjhatī


Oh! extinction is so very blissful,
As taught by the One Rightly Self-Awakened:
Sorrowless, stainless, secure;
Where suffering all ceases


etaṁ santaṁ etaṁ paṇītaṁ yadidaṁ sabbasaṅkhārasamatho sabbūpadhipaṭi nissaggo taṇhakkhayo virāgo nirodho nibbānaṁ

This is peaceful, this is excellent, that is: the stilling of all preparations, the relinquishment of all attachments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation, extinction.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests