Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by binocular » Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:20 pm

Coëmgenu wrote:
Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:36 pm
Or that the Buddha could do this, "defy" the "natural" elements, on account of his own cultivation of ṛddhi
I'm not sure about that. I think it's more that the whole Universe transpired in such a way that the Buddha emerged.

I'm not sure it is adequate to portray the Buddha as similar to a romantic hero who out of chaos creates order, acting out of his own innate creative potential.
What if the Buddha's bowl flowed against the stream as a literary echo of how the Buddha defies the "stream" of transmigrations. Would that make the story "false"?
I think it would be a common-sensical explanation of the story.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

chownah
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by chownah » Sun Jan 14, 2018 2:52 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:35 pm
SarathW wrote:
Fri Jan 12, 2018 8:33 pm
It is naive, lacking faith, asked in bad faith, dependent on the definition of "faith" in question.
Perhaps this story is a parable.
Some say this story is a symbol of Buddha going against the accepted practices on those days.
Some would say that calling the story "a parable" is the same thing as saying that is it "false".
Calling a story or a parable true or false is a misrepresentation. Stories are not true or false...they are just stories. It is what the story brings to our minds and how we interpret it which contains any concept of trueness or falseness to be found.
chownah

chownah
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by chownah » Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:09 am

binocular wrote:
Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:22 pm
Coëmgenu wrote:
Fri Jan 12, 2018 7:17 pm
I think the OP misunderstood the cleric and though that he was claiming that the river flowed "backward" here. A river flowing "backward" would carry the Buddha's bowl upstream. This still does not address the specification that the Buddha's bowl went against the stream of the river. It is an understandable mistake IMO. The documentary is somewhat unclear.
And yet several posters took it upon themselves to find a common-sensical explanation for how the Buddha's bowl could float against the stream. How come they did that?
Because it is the topic of discussion for this thread....now do you understand how come they do that?
chownah

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1805
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by Coëmgenu » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:09 am

binocular wrote:
Sat Jan 13, 2018 10:20 pm
Coëmgenu wrote: What if the Buddha's bowl flowed against the stream as a literary echo of how the Buddha defies the "stream" of transmigrations. Would that make the story "false"?
I think it would be a common-sensical explanation of the story.
Is it? What makes it common-sensical? The underlying belief that the Buddha likely did not float around shooting fire & water out of his body because "we" (whoever that is) never seem to see people floating around performing such actions, or because the trees of the forest do not usually bow themselves down to the ground in prostration when a Dharma Master passes by?

Some people say and/or believe (or perceive, I suppose!) realized lamas do not touch the ground. They float ever-so-slightly above it. They will say that if you look really closely at X or Y YouTube video of them preaching, you can actually see this slight levitation. I have never spotted it, despite being shown it and having it allegedly pointed out to me by a "true believer".
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.
吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

नस्वातोनापिपरतोनद्वाभ्यांनाप्यहेतुतः

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by binocular » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:12 am

chownah wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:09 am
Because it is the topic of discussion for this thread....now do you understand how come they do that?
As long as there exist alternative -- traditional, actually -- explanations of how come that bowl floated in the opposite direction, the scope of this topic is, obviously, wider than just trying to come up with common-sensical explanations.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by binocular » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:15 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:36 pm
binocular wrote:
Sat Jan 13, 2018 12:30 pm
That misses the point then, the point being that Moses had God-given powers to defy the natural elements.
Or that the Buddha could do this, "defy" the "natural" elements, on account of his own cultivation of ṛddhi,
One more thing:
The Buddha-to-be didn't tell the bowl to float in the opposite direction. He made a stipulation: “If I shall be able to-day to become a Buddha, let this pot go up the stream; if not, let it go down the stream!” So this isn't about his powers defying the natural elements.
Coëmgenu wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:09 am
Is it? What makes it common-sensical? The underlying belief that the Buddha likely did not float around shooting fire & water out of his body because "we" (whoever that is) never seem to see people floating around performing such actions, or because the trees of the forest do not usually bow themselves down to the ground in prostration when a Dharma Master passes by?
Yes.
Some people say and/or believe (or perceive, I suppose!) realized lamas do not touch the ground. They float ever-so-slightly above it. They will say that if you look really closely at X or Y YouTube video of them preaching, you can actually see this slight levitation. I have never spotted it, despite being shown it and having it allegedly pointed out to me by a "true believer".
I don't think lamas are in the same category as the Buddha (yes, yes, I know, but this is a Theravada forum, and I can say that).
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1805
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by Coëmgenu » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:21 am

binocular wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:15 am
Coëmgenu wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:09 am
Is it? What makes it common-sensical? The underlying belief that the Buddha likely did not float around shooting fire & water out of his body because "we" (whoever that is) never seem to see people floating around performing such actions, or because the trees of the forest do not usually bow themselves down to the ground in prostration when a Dharma Master passes by?
Yes.
If anything, a literalist account, "it happened just like how I think the text describes it happening" is a better guard against fake Buddhas.

In the instance of the Twin Miracle, all Buddhas float around and shoot fire and water out of their bodies specifically before the gates of Śrāvastī.

I'd like to see a false claimant of Buddhahood perform that miracle. Or making a bowl flow specifically against the current of a river would suffice.

Does that make me more or less gullible for saying that? Is the Tathāgata found in his supernatural displays or his dhamma? Is there a difference between his supernatural displays and his dhamma?
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.
吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

नस्वातोनापिपरतोनद्वाभ्यांनाप्यहेतुतः

chownah
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by chownah » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:50 am

binocular wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:12 am
chownah wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:09 am
Because it is the topic of discussion for this thread....now do you understand how come they do that?
As long as there exist alternative -- traditional, actually -- explanations of how come that bowl floated in the opposite direction, the scope of this topic is, obviously, wider than just trying to come up with common-sensical explanations.
This exchange started when you said:
And yet several posters took it upon themselves to find a common-sensical explanation for how the Buddha's bowl could float against the stream. How come they did that?
The title of the thread is asking for common sense explanations.....the original post asks for common sense explanations.....now do you understand why people gave common sense explanations?....do you understand how come they did that?
chownah

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by binocular » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:52 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:21 am
If anything, a literalist account, "it happened just like how I think the text describes it happening" is a better guard against fake Buddhas.
Yes, absolutely, thank you for pointing this out.

When the options are whittled down to either 1. insist in the text, regardless of what it says, or 2. invent a plausible-seeming, but worldly explanation, I think it's better to go with the former.

However, I wouldn't call this a deliberate, rational decision. I think it's a matter of reverence -- something that isn't talked about much in these corners, and which is not easy to explain esp. to scientifically-minded people. (And I admit I have some fear about risking the disapproval of some posters.)
I think it's sad that many people don't seem to distinguish between gullibility and reverence, and think it's all gullibility. And there are probably others who believe it's all reverence.
Is the Tathāgata found in his supernatural displays or his dhamma? Is there a difference between his supernatural displays and his dhamma?
I'm afraid this is above my paygrade. I did ask Venerable Dhammanando for help. He used to have a passage in his signature about reverence. I don't remember it exactly, but it was about the importance of reverence.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by binocular » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:53 am

chownah wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:50 am
The title of the thread is asking for common sense explanations.....the original post asks for common sense explanations.....now do you understand why people gave common sense explanations?....do you understand how come they did that?
This is a Buddhist forum. We don't have to limit ourselves to common-sensical explanations of the Buddha's miracles.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1805
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by Coëmgenu » Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:55 am

Coëmgenu wrote:
binocular wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:52 am
Is the Tathāgata found in his supernatural displays or his dhamma? Is there a difference between his supernatural displays and his dhamma?
I'm afraid this is above my paygrade. I did ask Venerable Dhammanando for help. He used to have a passage in his signature about reverence. I don't remember it exactly, but it was about the importance of reverence.
What I was dancing around and implying indirectly is: Is the notion that one can sever karma and escape transmigration any more "radical" "miraculous" "impossible" and "contravening common-sense" (presuming transmigration is considered "common sense") than a Buddha floating about and shooting fire and water out of his body? Or a Buddha's bowl floating against a stream?
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.
吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

नस्वातोनापिपरतोनद्वाभ्यांनाप्यहेतुतः

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by binocular » Sun Jan 14, 2018 12:00 pm

Coëmgenu wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:55 am
What I was dancing around and implying indirectly is: Is the notion that one can sever karma and escape transmigration any more "radical" "miraculous" "impossible" and "contravening common-sense" than a Buddha floating about and shooting fire and water out of his body? Or a Buddha's bowl floating against a stream?
The notion that a complete cessation of suffering, the severing of kamma, escaping transmigration are possible is, in my opinion, extraordinary -- it's radical, miraculous, contravening common-sense, and for all practical intents and purposes, seems utterly impossible.


This from an old exchange:
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:
Mon May 20, 2013 7:50 pm
binocular wrote:The Buddhist proposition is as - excuse the word - outlandish as anything can get.

Ordinarily, many people expect to be miserable their whole life, to be, in Freud's words "commonly unhappy." Ordinarily, many people expect to think that "life as it is usually lived" is as good as it gets. Ordinarily, many people expect to live a life or quiet desperation.

Already the mere idea that we could get beyond that predicament, is categorically, universally, galactically, radically at odds with our usual expectations about life.
I don't think even you know what the above means, so I won't pretend to understand what you're saying.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

chownah
Posts: 7550
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by chownah » Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:37 pm

binocular wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:53 am
chownah wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:50 am
The title of the thread is asking for common sense explanations.....the original post asks for common sense explanations.....now do you understand why people gave common sense explanations?....do you understand how come they did that?
This is a Buddhist forum. We don't have to limit ourselves to common-sensical explanations of the Buddha's miracles.
You are the only want who seems to be trying to limit the discussion.....you seem to want to limit the discussion to certain things and you seem to be specifically trying to avoid the actual topic of this thread as stated in the title and as expressed in the original post....

The topic here is asking for common sense explanations. The title of the thread is asking for common sense explanations.....the original post asks for common sense explanations.....now do you understand why people gave common sense explanations?....do you understand how come they did that?

Everyone else here seems to understand.....except you.....what's up? Its not like your disconnect in this regard is subtle. It doesn't take much discernment to see that providing a common sense explanation is what was asked. This contrarian type of posting is not so unusual for you as can be seen by looking through your posting history.

IN this thread it mostly started with your absurd declaration of your having a better understand of my mother in law than I have.......and it just keeps on keeping on......what.is.up?
chownah

User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 1805
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by Coëmgenu » Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:36 pm

chownah wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:37 pm
binocular wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:53 am
chownah wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 11:50 am
The title of the thread is asking for common sense explanations.....the original post asks for common sense explanations.....now do you understand why people gave common sense explanations?....do you understand how come they did that?
This is a Buddhist forum. We don't have to limit ourselves to common-sensical explanations of the Buddha's miracles.
You are the only want who seems to be trying to limit the discussion.....you seem to want to limit the discussion to certain things and you seem to be specifically trying to avoid the actual topic of this thread as stated in the title and as expressed in the original post....

The topic here is asking for common sense explanations. The title of the thread is asking for common sense explanations.....the original post asks for common sense explanations.....now do you understand why people gave common sense explanations?
If you will forgive my unsolicited barging-in, is "common sense perception" equivalent to "as-it-is reality?" I think this is an important ambiguity involving "common sense" and its intersection with Buddhadharma.

Is common sensibility identical to tathātā? To yathābhūtaṃ?
世尊在靈山會上拈華示眾眾皆默然唯迦葉破顏微笑世尊云
The Lord dwelt at the Vulture Peak with the assembly and plucked a flower as a teaching. The myriad totality were silent, save for Kāśyapa, whose face cracked in a faint smile. The Lord spoke.
吾有正法眼藏涅槃妙心實相無相微妙法門不立文字教外別傳付囑摩訶迦葉。
I have the treasure of the true dharma eye, I have nirvāṇa as wondrous citta, I know signless dharmatā, the subtle dharma-gate, which is not standing on written word, which is external to scriptures, which is a special dispensation, which is entrusted to Mahākāśyapa.

नस्वातोनापिपरतोनद्वाभ्यांनाप्यहेतुतः

binocular
Posts: 5638
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?

Post by binocular » Sun Jan 14, 2018 6:43 pm

chownah wrote:
Sun Jan 14, 2018 1:37 pm
You are the only want who seems to be trying to limit the discussion.....you seem to want to limit the discussion to certain things and you seem to be specifically trying to avoid the actual topic of this thread as stated in the title and as expressed in the original post....
Have you read Ven. Dhammanando's posts here?
The topic here is asking for common sense explanations. The title of the thread is asking for common sense explanations.....the original post asks for common sense explanations.....now do you understand why people gave common sense explanations?....do you understand how come they did that?
This is the OP, again:
SarathW wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 9:12 pm
Is Ganges river back flow in Varanasi?
Is this the support for the story that Buddha's alms bowel went up word the Ganges river?
Clearly, the possible answers to the second question are at least Yes and No.
Everyone else here seems to understand.....except you.....what's up? Its not like your disconnect in this regard is subtle. It doesn't take much discernment to see that providing a common sense explanation is what was asked. This contrarian type of posting is not so unusual for you as can be seen by looking through your posting history.
Have you read Ven. Dhammanando's posts here?
Dhammanando wrote:
Sun Dec 31, 2017 5:39 am
SarathW wrote:
Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:14 pm
wasn't this the Neranjara River
That's right. Thanks.
I am just wondering this is just a natural up flowing of Neranjara river.
Of course not. It's an abbhutadhamma or miracle story. It would hardly have been worth reporting if the dish had just acted normally and floated in the direction one would expect it to float..


IN this thread it mostly started with your absurd declaration of your having a better understand of my mother in law than I have.......and it just keeps on keeping on......what.is.up?
I think your personal dislike of me is clouding your reasoning.
Every person we save is one less zombie to fight. -- World War Z

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], cappuccino, Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], rightviewftw, Sam Vara and 100 guests