User1249x wrote: ↑Last i checked unsubstantiated claims were against ToS as well, i wish this was upheld and this forum did not serve as a platform for heresy.
The first and foremost unsubstantiated claim id's that the sutta as a whole are the exact reflection of what the Buddha taught. There is no proof of that whatsoever.
To me it makes perfect sense to see them as a mixbag collection of accurate and distorted, authentic or plain forged. Just like with any multisecular religious text...
A set of data need not be to be completely uncorrupted for one to be able to infer the true meaning enough to form a comprehensive theory and identify the corrupted bits if there is enough uncorrupted data.
Then everybody here is in agreement, because this is certainly what I believe, and it seems to be Doo Doot's take too.
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pm
The first fetter for stream entry is "Doubt of the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha" this means faith is a factor. Now this is a forum called Dhamma Wheel, intended for those who have faith in the Dhamma (the 4.5 nikayas verified to be authentic).
First, I don't know what you are referring to when you mention texts that have been "verified to be authentic". How is that possible?
Second, what is it that allows you to equate "the Dhamma" with the texts we have now in 2019?
If you start doubting the 4.5 nikayas then no progress can ever be made as no consistency can be maintained.
First, I don't think that is necessarily the case. If you classify your information based on its most probable degree of authenticity then you can fully rely on the texts that do not raise any question, and read the more dubious ones with a grain of salt.
Second, even if it were the case that consistency would be impossible, turning a blind eye to authenticity issues and accepting the whole thing on faith alone is just taking the easy way out and chosing the convenient solution at the expense of credibility, and possibly, truth.
Lastly, regarding the name of the forum and the implicit censorship you would like to see on DooDoots opinions, I really wonder what makes them so threatening that they should be fought so vigorously. If your faith were strong then you would not feel threatened by the tiniest diverging approach of the texts as you and others seem to be. If DooDoot has a different conceptual framework to study the sutta then so be it, it's not going to harm anyone, and certainly not you or anyone on this forum. I don't see why his views should not be tolerated and expressed somewhere else because you guys can't stand reading them. Talking about heresy as someone else did is extremely disturbing in this day and age. I left islam partly for that reason, and I hate to find the same attitude in buddhism too...
First, I don't think that is necessarily the case. If you classify your information based on its most probable degree of authenticity then you can fully rely on the texts that do not raise any question, and read the more dubious ones with a grain of salt.
Second, even if it were the case that consistency would be impossible, turning a blind eye to authenticity issues and accepting the whole thing on faith alone is just taking the easy way out and chosing the convenient solution at the expense of credibility, and possibly, truth.
Lastly, regarding the name of the forum and the implicit censorship you would like to see on DooDoots opinions, I really wonder what makes them so threatening that they should be fought so vigorously. If your faith were strong then you would not feel threatened by the tiniest diverging approach of the texts as you and others seem to be. If DooDoot has a different conceptual framework to study the sutta then so be it, it's not going to harm anyone, and certainly not you or anyone on this forum. I don't see why his views should not be tolerated and expressed somewhere else because you guys can't stand reading them. Talking about heresy as someone else did is extremely disturbing in this day and age. I left islam partly for that reason, and I hate to find the same attitude in buddhism too...
First, Ashokas's pillars and edicts is what they used to authenticate the nikayas, and there's a plethora of scholastic articles on that
Second, I am not threatened in the least I couldn't care less what his views are, but yes there needs to be a general agreement and consensus for progress to be made, otherwise every thread is derailed with antics, people keep having to go 2 step backwards regarding topics that everyone has already accepted. If you want to always reinvent the wheel do so at your own expense, not the expense of others. Your own OP implied rebirth in stream-entry as well, this is what you invited people to discuss, not if there is rebirth at all. In general, people want to make progress in the dhamma, and they can't do so if not everyone is in agreement on the foundation. So as long as this continues no progress can be made as everyone will always be stuck at square one. And this has been going on for as long as DooDoot has been on this forum, just look at my meditation threads that he countlessly derailed.
Third, I actually don't mind the atheistic perspective of Buddhism if people are being honest and straight forward with their arguments then everyone can learn something, my problem with posters is their lack of inability to make logical arguments, either by being dishonest or by being ignorant, and it's usually a mix of both.
Fourth, speaking of censorship my responses were deleted a few times, I can't censor anyone since I don't have power, but retrofuturist seems to have censored others on behalf of doodoot.
A couple of brief moderator comments before we get back to topic..
Lostitude wrote:Lastly, regarding the name of the forum and the implicit censorship you would like to see on DooDoots opinions, I really wonder what makes them so threatening that they should be fought so vigorously. If your faith were strong then you would not feel threatened by the tiniest diverging approach of the texts as you and others seem to be. If DooDoot has a different conceptual framework to study the sutta then so be it, it's not going to harm anyone, and certainly not you or anyone on this forum. I don't see why his views should not be tolerated and expressed somewhere else because you guys can't stand reading them. Talking about heresy as someone else did is extremely disturbing in this day and age. I left islam partly for that reason, and I hate to find the same attitude in buddhism too...
I agree whole-heartedly that all members should be tolerant of each other's rights to sincerely express their views. If someone has a problem with someone else, please add them as a Foe on your Control Panel so you do not see their posts. Moderators and other staff members don't want to hear incessant intolerance manifest as incessant whinging.
Budo wrote:And this has been going on for as long as DooDoot has been on this forum, just look at my meditation threads that he countlessly derailed.
Speaking for this conversation, DooDoot has, by and large, been keeping this topic on track despite a couple of interlocutors who have insisted on locking horns and arguing with him, with little to no respect for the actual topic at hand. Just because someone is present at a crime-scene doesn't automatically make them the perpetrator, no matter how suspicious you think they look. Otherwise you, or I are guilty too, just for being here. Because that makes no sense, we moderate according to the Terms of Service, and not by feelings, personal proclivities, correlation or suspicion.
Budo wrote:Fourth, speaking of censorship my responses were deleted a few times, I can't censor anyone since I don't have power, but retrofuturist seems to have censored others on behalf of doodoot.
Regrettably, quite a few posts have had to be removed from this topic for being off-topic, meta-discussion and/or personal attacks. I'm not going to go into details of who and how many, but let's just say you're not alone, and that it's on behalf of the Terms Of Service that posts are moderated... not on behalf of a certain member. There is an official complaints process or you or anyone else feels it is being done differently... "in topic" is not the place for such discussion.
Now, everyone, please calm down and get...
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."
A senior monk once told me he thinks that the 7 lives figure could be an estimated figure added in later, and initially the Buddha just mentioned after a couples of lives without a specific figure. Can this be possible?
form wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 11:46 pm
A senior monk once told me he thinks that the 7 lives figure could be an estimated figure added in later, and initially the Buddha just mentioned after a couples of lives without a specific figure. Can this be possible?
Thus have I heard, and potentially mis-remembered.
A streamwinner cannot be born in the lower realms, only to the human realm and higher. From memory though, the suttas give no account of a streamwinner being born in the human realm. Invariably they are described by the Buddha to Ananda as going in a higher realm, before invariably going onto unbinding. Were there to be seven, incrementally higher births (keeping in mind, no specific cases of this are described by the Buddha to Ananda), it would be a long and largely heavenly, and not too shabby existence.
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."
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pmThe first fetter for stream entry is "Doubt of the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha" this means faith is a factor.
The factor of faith in the Dhamma appears exclusively defined as follows:
Furthermore, he is endowed with verified confidence (faith) in the Dhamma: ‘The Dhamma is well-expounded by the Blessed One, to be seen here & now, timeless, inviting verification, pertinent, to be realized by the wise for themselves.’
In basically every Theravada monastery, even morning, every evening, it is chanted as follows:
Yet, you, Budo, appear to assert those Buddhists who have lived in monasteries and chanted this for many years, taking strict refuge in it, are not Buddhists but, are, instead, heretics?
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pmNow this is a forum called Dhamma Wheel, intended for those who have faith in the Dhamma
The above sutta appears to be different what you wrote above. The suttas refer to "verified faith in the Dhamma".
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pmNow this is a forum called Dhamma Wheel, intended for those who have faith in the Dhamma (the 4.5 nikayas verified to be authentic).
Where is the above written in the DhammaWheel TOS? Thanks
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pmYou can call this ScholasticWheel instead but monks who come here and those serious practioners don't doubt the original 4.5 nikayas.
Is the above really true? Where is the evidence for this? Thanks
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pmTherefore as a religion and a faith, it is granted that the 4.5 nikayas are authentic and the words of the Buddha.
Really? Where is this written?
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pmThose who come here doubting the words of the Buddha, are better suited for Pragmatic Dharma or Scholastic university programs. As you can see this subforum is called "General Theravada Discussion" not "General Scholastic Discussion" or "Connections to other paths"
The above arguments appears strange to me. Please quote some suttas.
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pmIf you start doubting the 4.5 nikayas then no progress can ever be made as no consistency can be maintained.
There appear to be contradictions in the suttas. More importantly, there appears to definitely be two levels or sorts of Dhamma in the suttas; even more. Its seems the Buddha often taught different things to different audiences & students.
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pm I also find it ironic that DooDoot always asks for sutta references and when he cannot change their meaning via changing their translations, he calls those suttas Questionable or Unauthentic.
Its not ironic at all when the Dhamma is defined as "Verified Dhamma". If a sutta can be verified it can be argued to be authentic.
budo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 3:07 pm]So either suttas are the golden standard or they're not, you can't have your cake and eat it too, you can't claim the suttas are the standard and then at the same time say Pali is a questionable and unknown language, and pick and choose at your convenience, this is inconsistent.
I have said before, the above type of petty arguing is very "worldly" to me. Its really got nothing to do with Buddhism. We should simply focus on the texts and what is written in the texts.
lostitude wrote: ↑Sat Feb 02, 2019 6:20 pmLastly, regarding the name of the forum and the implicit censorship you would like to see ... I left islam partly for that reason, and I hate to find the same attitude in buddhism too...
Yes, you personally left Islam and, similarly, Western Buddhism is made of a diversity of people from non-Buddhist backgrounds and many of these people are unable to abandon their social/cultural conditioning. This can be observed when the debate becomes vigorous and certain members fall back on their habitual cultural/social ways of arguing; similar to petty litigious quibbling over Talmudic Law or faith fundamentalism of Christianity or Cultural Marxist censorship and demonizing of individuals. Buddhism is different. Buddhism teaches to investigate any heard teaching, as follows:
When he has investigated him and has seen that he is purified from states based on delusion, then he places faith in him; filled with faith he visits him and pays respect to him; having paid respect to him, he gives ear; when he gives ear, he hears the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma, he memorises it and examines (tests; upaparikkhati) the meaning (benefit; atthaṃ) of the teachings he has memorised; when he examines their meaning, he gains a reflective acceptance (nijjhānaṃkhamanti) of those teachings; when he has gained a reflective acceptance of those teachings, zeal springs up; when zeal has sprung up, he applies his will; having applied his will, he scrutinises; having scrutinised, he strives; resolutely striving, he realises (sacchikaroti ) with the body the supreme truth and sees it by penetrating (ativijjha) it with wisdom (paññāya). In this way, Bhāradvāja, there is the discovery of truth; in this way one discovers truth; in this way we describe the discovery of truth. But as yet there is no final arrival at truth.
The final arrival at truth, Bhāradvāja, lies in the repetition, development and cultivation of those same things. In this way, Bhāradvāja, there is the final arrival at truth; in this way one finally arrives at truth; in this way we describe the final arrival at truth.
In the same sutta above, blind faith was criticised:
Suppose there were a file of blind men each in touch with the next: the first one does not see, the middle one does not see, and the last one does not see. So too, Bhāradvāja, in regard to their statement the brahmins seem to be like a file of blind men: the first one does not see, the middle one does not see, and the last one does not see. What do you think, Bhāradvāja, that being so, does not the faith of the brahmins turn out to be groundless?”
Bhikkhu Thanissaro has a video speech about this, where he said the standards or criticisms applied to the Brahmans in the suttas, about blind faith, Buddhists themselves do not follow or apply to their own Buddhism. I will try to find the video.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.
Yes DooDoot, and rebirth is part of the dhamma, so the only heretic I know of (in your words, not mine), is yourself. Nice try, trying to associate yourself with monks. That appeal to authority has been denied. Also why ask for sutta references if in your own words pali is an unknowable language, why waste time?
I am here to help members who are interested in the dhamma, not members who are in interested in their own ideology, that's a waste of time for me.
Last edited by budo on Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 9:50 am
Yes DooDoot, and rebirth is part of the dhamma, so the only heretic I know of (in your words, not mine), is yourself. Nice try, trying to associate yourself with monks. That appeal to auhority has been denied. Also why ask for sutta references if in your own words pali is an unknowable language, why waste time?
I am here to help members who are interested in the dhamma, not members who are in interested in their own ideology, that's a waste of time for me.
Hi Budo!
What Pāli word can we know for sure to be correctly translated as "rebirth"?
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 9:50 am
Yes DooDoot, and rebirth is part of the dhamma, so the only heretic I know of (in your words, not mine), is yourself. Nice try, trying to associate yourself with monks. That appeal to auhority has been denied. Also why ask for sutta references if in your own words pali is an unknowable language, why waste time?
I am here to help members who are interested in the dhamma, not members who are in interested in their own ideology, that's a waste of time for me.
Hi Budo!
What Pāli word can we know for sure to be correctly translated as "rebirth"?
Thanks!
That's a question for a pali specialist, perhaps Bhikkhu Analayo, Bodhi, Thanissaro, Sujato, etc..
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 9:50 am
Yes DooDoot, and rebirth is part of the dhamma, so the only heretic I know of (in your words, not mine), is yourself. Nice try, trying to associate yourself with monks. That appeal to auhority has been denied. Also why ask for sutta references if in your own words pali is an unknowable language, why waste time?
I am here to help members who are interested in the dhamma, not members who are in interested in their own ideology, that's a waste of time for me.
Hi Budo!
What Pāli word can we know for sure to be correctly translated as "rebirth"?
Thanks!
That's a question for a pali specialist, perhaps Bhikkhu Analayo, Bodhi, Thanissaro, Sujato, etc..
If you are not completely sure by yourself about what word can be translated (again, for sure) as "rebirth", then how can you sure that "rebirth" was part of the Dhamma?
What Pāli word can we know for sure to be correctly translated as "rebirth"?
Thanks!
That's a question for a pali specialist, perhaps Bhikkhu Analayo, Bodhi, Thanissaro, Sujato, etc..
If you are not completely sure by yourself about what word can be translated (again, for sure) as "rebirth", then how can you sure that "rebirth" was part of the Dhamma?
Kind regards!
Because in any field there is a consensus when it comes to a topic, and people are free to challenge that consensus at their own expense in their own communities, hence conspiracy theoriest communities which I am totally fine with.
Now I myself could read thousands of articles and research on Pali and Buddhism and spend 10 years at a university like Bhikkhu Analayo, and Bhante Henepola did, or I could rely on the work they produced.
The Theravadan consensus is that there is rebirth. If atheistic Buddhists wish to challenge that, then they should also become pali specialists and translate the whole Pali Canon, and then I will read it and make comparisons.
So DooDoot should fund a project to retranslate the entire Pali Canon and put in the same amount of work that Sujato, Thanissaro, Analayo, Bodhi, Gunaratana, etc.. did
Non-Buddhist. "Conspiracy theoriest" sounds like a totalitarian political doctrine. The suttas teach critical analysis of teachings, as I quoted from MN 95, for example.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 amNow I myself could read thousands of articles and research on Pali and Buddhism and spend 10 years at a university like Bhikkhu Analayo, and Bhante Henepola did, or I could rely on the work they produced.
Not at all. While I am not declaring Thailand's Bhikkhu Buddhadasa as correct, he probably has more doctorates than Analayo but has a different view. Regardless, I doubt a Buddhist doctorate from a Western university means Dhamma is understood. Gombrich, for example, has wrong views.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 amThe Theravadan consensus is that there is rebirth.
Consensus is not the Dhamma.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 am If atheistic Buddhists
"Atheism" or "theism" is not something Buddhist. These are criteria or standards from alien doctrines.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 am pali specialists and translate the whole Pali Canon, and then I will read it and make comparisons.
We have. But when we post suttas from the Pali we get ignored by you .
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 amSo DooDoot should fund a project to retranslate the entire Pali Canon and put in the same amount of work that Sujato, Thanissaro, Analayo, Bodhi, Gunaratana, etc.. did
Thailand's Bhikkhu Buddhadasa translated lots of suttas. Thanissaro in Shape Of Suffering provides a here-&-now teaching about all of Dependent Origination. Ajahn Chah taught his Western monks Dependent Origination from Ajahn Buddhadasa. Regardless, if a person such as yourself declares to not know Pali, i think they cannot judge whether any scholar is competent. Whatever consensus politics you post, I trust lots of individuals have zero interest in it. You pick one or two scholars and think they all agree with you. Thanissaro obviously does not agree with you in his Shape Of Suffering.
In truth. In sacca.
Last edited by DooDoot on Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:39 am, edited 4 times in total.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 am
Because in any field there is a consensus when it comes to a topic, and people are free to challenge that consensus at their own expense in their own communities, hence conspiracy theoriest communities which I am totally fine with.
Now I myself could read thousands of articles and research on Pali and Buddhism and spend 10 years at a university like Bhikkhu Analayo, and Bhante Henepola did, or I could rely on the work they produced.
The Theravadan consensus is that there is rebirth. If atheistic Buddhists wish to challenge that, then they should also become pali specialists and translate the whole Pali Canon, and then I will read it and make comparisons.
So DooDoot should fund a project to retranslate the entire Pali Canon and put in the same amount of work that Sujato, Thanissaro, Analayo, Bodhi, Gunaratana, etc.. did
Thanks for that quick answer!
Fair enough. But it should be kept in mind that textual and historical studies have their limits.
In Christianity, we have fundamentalist "scholars" spending a great part of their lives trying to find the age of the Earth based on the scriptures alone.
So, as you can see, time and effort spent should not be equated to certainty; neither should consensus.
That being said, I agree with the academic consensus about rebirth: I really think that the Buddha believed in post-mortem rebirth, while at the same time I think the Dhamma does not need rebirth to be effective in its final goal. In consequence, I don't think the Buddha was omniscient (i.e. He could made mistakes).
Non-Buddhist. "Conspiracy theoriest" sounds like a totalitarian political doctrine.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 amNow I myself could read thousands of articles and research on Pali and Buddhism and spend 10 years at a university like Bhikkhu Analayo, and Bhante Henepola did, or I could rely on the work they produced.
Not at all. While I am not declaring Thailand's Bhikkhu Buddhadasa as correct, he probably has more doctorates than Analayo but has a different view. Regardless, I doubt a Buddhist doctorate from a Western university means Dhamma is understood. Gombrich, for example, has wrong views.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 amThe Theravadan consensus is that there is rebirth.
Consensus is not the Dhamma.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 am If atheistic Buddhists
"Atheism" is not something Buddhist.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 am pali specialists and translate the whole Pali Canon, and then I will read it and make comparisons.
We have. But when we post suttas from the Pali we get ignored by you .
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 amSo DooDoot should fund a project to retranslate the entire Pali Canon and put in the same amount of work that Sujato, Thanissaro, Analayo, Bodhi, Gunaratana, etc.. did
Thailand's Bhikkhu Buddhadasa translated lots of suttas. Thanissaro in Shape Of Suffering provides a here-&-now teaching about all of Dependent Origination. Ajahn Chah taught his Western monks Dependent Origination from Ajahn Buddhadasa. Regardless, if a person such as yourself declares to not know Pali, i think they cannot judge whether any scholar is competent.
In truth. In sacca.
So you are saying all the suttas translated by Thanissaro on rebirth and recollecting past lives are wrong? Doesn't seem consistent or intelllectually honest.
budo wrote: ↑Sun Feb 03, 2019 10:22 am
Because in any field there is a consensus when it comes to a topic, and people are free to challenge that consensus at their own expense in their own communities, hence conspiracy theoriest communities which I am totally fine with.
Now I myself could read thousands of articles and research on Pali and Buddhism and spend 10 years at a university like Bhikkhu Analayo, and Bhante Henepola did, or I could rely on the work they produced.
The Theravadan consensus is that there is rebirth. If atheistic Buddhists wish to challenge that, then they should also become pali specialists and translate the whole Pali Canon, and then I will read it and make comparisons.
So DooDoot should fund a project to retranslate the entire Pali Canon and put in the same amount of work that Sujato, Thanissaro, Analayo, Bodhi, Gunaratana, etc.. did
Thanks for that quick answer!
Fair enough. But it should be kept in mind that textual and historical studies have their limits.
In Christianity, we have fundamentalist "scholars" spending a great part of their lives trying to find the age of the Earth based on the scriptures alone.
So, as you can see, time and effort spent should not be equated to certainty; neither should consensus.
That being said, I agree with the academic consensus about rebirth: I really think that the Buddha believed in post-mortem rebirth, while at the same time I think the Dhamma does not need rebirth to be effective in its final goal. In consequence, I don't think the Buddha was omniscient (i.e. He could made mistakes).
Greetings!
That's fine, and you're free to fund and work many hours on producing a polished scholastic product to refute those christians, and let it be judged by the christian community.
