I think that the Buddhadhamma is actually very good for me thank you Dan74. : It is not views per se that obscure us, it is wrong views. Another difference possibly between the Theravada and views that derive from the Vedanta.
Papanca according to many Theravadin commentators is not simply "views". It is a proliferation of views which are not to be found in the descriptions of being as outlined in the Pali Canon. Views which reinforce the sense of a permanent self, and which tend to an interpretation that suggests the existence of an atta.
But if I ever feel the need to explore a rather strange Zen/Theravada hybrid pov I am sure I will know where to turn.
Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
-
- Posts: 1614
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
- Location: By the River Thames near London.
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.
Bhikku Bodhi.
Bhikku Bodhi.
- jcsuperstar
- Posts: 1915
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 5:15 am
- Location: alaska
- Contact:
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
let's not forget who we're talking about hereBen wrote:Hi MikeI thought this writer seemed to ring some bells...mikenz66 wrote:For further amusement you can read this Amazon Forum:
Denise Anderson says:
FreeThinker says:
Kenneth,
Please share with us your bountiful knowledge and explain the Theravada concept of the Unconditioned, including how it is seen from a traditional Theravada point of view as being part of the material/5 skandas.
A: Theravada is utterly materialistic by its OWN accord....evidences for same? ......
Bhikkhu Bodhi (Theravada's ignorant mouthpiece)
kind regardsBhikkhu Bodhi, Mara’s right-hand whore
--http://www.attan.com/bb.html
Ben
*The webmaster of attan.com is an expert in Pali and translates same, in Buddhist doctrine, and has poured through the earliest existing doctrine of Buddhism, day after day, year after year, over and over again, lectures, and writes on same.
Admittedly egotistically, the webmaster of attan.com claims outright that there are none alive who have a more extensive knowledge of earliest Buddhist doctrine and its philosophy, than himself.
สัพเพ สัตตา สุขีตา โหนตุ
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
the mountain may be heavy in and of itself, but if you're not trying to carry it it's not heavy to you- Ajaan Suwat
-
- Posts: 1614
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
- Location: By the River Thames near London.
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
He might of course be correct about having an extensive knowledge of Buddhist philosophy, proof positive that it doesnt mean that much unless it underpins Buddhist practice, particularly meditation practice. Then it is highly valuable.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.
Bhikku Bodhi.
Bhikku Bodhi.
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
Hi tilt,tiltbillings wrote:If there were a permanent, unchanging self/soul that is an agent and that we ultimately are, how would it relate to that which changes without changing? If it acts, it changes. If it feels it changes. If it goes from ignorance to knowledge it changes. It goes from delusion to awakening it changes. In other words, this supposed truly true unchanging self/soul that we supposedly truly are begins looking like the khandhas - it changes.
according to the Buddhas teachings, if there were a permanent, unchanging self/soul it wouldn't relate to anything.
I posted something here, last passage. Maybe someone finds it interessting.
best wishes, acinteyyo
Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
He has a Pali dictionary but no real knowledge of the language or much else related to the Pali suttas.Sanghamitta wrote:He might of course be correct about having an extensive knowledge of Buddhist philosophy,
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
Thanks. It is to the point.acinteyyo wrote:Hi tilt,tiltbillings wrote:If there were a permanent, unchanging self/soul that is an agent and that we ultimately are, how would it relate to that which changes without changing? If it acts, it changes. If it feels it changes. If it goes from ignorance to knowledge it changes. It goes from delusion to awakening it changes. In other words, this supposed truly true unchanging self/soul that we supposedly truly are begins looking like the khandhas - it changes.
according to the Buddhas teachings, if there were a permanent, unchanging self/soul it wouldn't relate to anything.
I posted something here, last passage. Maybe someone finds it interessting.
best wishes, acinteyyo
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
-
- Posts: 1614
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
- Location: By the River Thames near London.
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
tiltbillings wrote:He has a Pali dictionary but no real knowledge of the language or much else related to the Pali suttas.Sanghamitta wrote:He might of course be correct about having an extensive knowledge of Buddhist philosophy,
I was being overly kind. Giving him the benefit of the doubt etc.
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.
Bhikku Bodhi.
Bhikku Bodhi.
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
I agree, it is not views that obstruct practice, but attachment to views. Views are like signposts. We can read the sign and go, or we can linger and marvel at the sign, try to protect it, etc.Sanghamitta wrote:I think that the Buddhadhamma is actually very good for me thank you Dan74. : It is not views per se that obscure us, it is wrong views. Another difference possibly between the Theravada and views that derive from the Vedanta.
Papanca according to many Theravadin commentators is not simply "views". It is a proliferation of views which are not to be found in the descriptions of being as outlined in the Pali Canon. Views which reinforce the sense of a permanent self, and which tend to an interpretation that suggests the existence of an atta.
But if I ever feel the need to explore a rather strange Zen/Theravada hybrid pov I am sure I will know where to turn.
Best we read the sign, bow in thanks and go!
_/|\_
_/|\_
-
- Posts: 980
- Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 5:27 am
- Contact:
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
Some great posts from Tilt, above.
(Hope those references were useful to you.)
(Hope those references were useful to you.)
My recently moved Blog, containing some of my writings on the Buddha Dhamma, as well as a number of translations from classical Buddhist texts and modern authors, liturgy, etc.: Huifeng's Prajnacara Blog.
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
Thanks. It is much appreciated.Paññāsikhara wrote: <<reaches over to dissertation, search "twenty" ... flip ... flip ... copy, paste >>
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
-
- Posts: 194
- Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
I always thought this was simpler than people often make it seem.
Other philosophies say there is someone behind experience, experiencing, for example, in western philosophy, homunculus theory. Buddhism says there is just experience, so you could say experience is self.
But experience doesn't fit any traditional definition of self or even any traditional definition of a concept or compounded object - it lacks an unchanging nature. There's nothing you can say about it to describe it - you can describe an experience using terms relative to other experiences, but you cannot describe experience itself, which is why it is unconditioned. When the lack of an experiencer is realised, attention given to attempts to improve the condition of the experiencer fades and all attention is given to experience. Life becomes luminous, blissful and so on.
Of course, experience always was all there was, but illusorily in a kind of feedback loop or cycle of samsara. This is where words, or at least my words fail in explaining. Where did the arrow come from? Can't be answered and a mistake to try, I guess.
Supposing the idea of an unchanging nature is a category mistake in the first place. The words 'unchanging nature' are just words, they lack an objective correlate.
Oh dear, have I made this simpler, as I claim at the beginning, or more complex?
Other philosophies say there is someone behind experience, experiencing, for example, in western philosophy, homunculus theory. Buddhism says there is just experience, so you could say experience is self.
But experience doesn't fit any traditional definition of self or even any traditional definition of a concept or compounded object - it lacks an unchanging nature. There's nothing you can say about it to describe it - you can describe an experience using terms relative to other experiences, but you cannot describe experience itself, which is why it is unconditioned. When the lack of an experiencer is realised, attention given to attempts to improve the condition of the experiencer fades and all attention is given to experience. Life becomes luminous, blissful and so on.
Of course, experience always was all there was, but illusorily in a kind of feedback loop or cycle of samsara. This is where words, or at least my words fail in explaining. Where did the arrow come from? Can't be answered and a mistake to try, I guess.
Supposing the idea of an unchanging nature is a category mistake in the first place. The words 'unchanging nature' are just words, they lack an objective correlate.
Oh dear, have I made this simpler, as I claim at the beginning, or more complex?
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.
the wheel is turning.
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
Out of curiosity, what was the established, brahminic understanding of atman/atta at the time of the Buddha?
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
Greetings Sean,
DN 1: Brahmajala Sutta
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/theravada/brahma1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
It seems there were about 62 different ones!seanpdx wrote:Out of curiosity, what was the established, brahminic understanding of atman/atta at the time of the Buddha?
DN 1: Brahmajala Sutta
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/theravada/brahma1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
"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."
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
Ok... but any vedic or upanisadic references?retrofuturist wrote:Greetings Sean,
It seems there were about 62 different ones!seanpdx wrote:Out of curiosity, what was the established, brahminic understanding of atman/atta at the time of the Buddha?
DN 1: Brahmajala Sutta
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/theravada/brahma1.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Metta,
Retro.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27858
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Challenging the traditional view of Anatta
Greetings Sean,
I do know however that Bhikkhu Bodhi has translated this text along with commentary and the whole thing exceeds 300 pages (IIRC) so there may be something in there.
Metta,
Retro.
I don't know, I'm probably not the one to ask.seanpdx wrote:Ok... but any vedic or upanisadic references?
I do know however that Bhikkhu Bodhi has translated this text along with commentary and the whole thing exceeds 300 pages (IIRC) so there may be something in there.
Metta,
Retro.
"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."