|
Paramemetic posted:A being, ultimately empty. A Tathagata, in the example I've given. An arisen phenomenon. This question isn't really relevant, if an emotion arises, then there is a being experiencing it. The emotion and the being arise together and are dependently arisen, one upon another.
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:07 |
|
|
And Lama Surya Das is far more diplomatic than me, don't assume anything about him because of me. I've only met him a few times anyway. I am saying what I am saying on my own.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Sounds like a sense of self to me! It is a sense of self in that we are talking about one who experiences conditioned states and clings to them as "me, mine, pertaining to myself". It isn't ideal but we are talking about suffering and these are the roots.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
The thinking with the four noble truths is that through lack of attachment to states, the states will fall away, not that they will remain and we just won't be attached to them. It is a certain perspective among many within Buddhism. There are other possible ways to go about the problem. Hope this helps
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
If I am not attached to being alive, this body will not die.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 01:40
|
|
|
Because wishing to experience states without being attached to them is the wish for power. Having control over your surroundings. Being powerful, above all. I guarantee you that is not what happens lol If you want to have this kind of power, you are not a Buddhist, yet.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 01:51
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:I'm pointing to a higher standard. Anyone who wants to adhere to the highest possible standards wouldn't get so bent out of shape about my characterizations. I don't know? I wasn't there. I suspect if I was, and I disagreed, I would be able to ask him for the scriptural basis of that claim, or to elaborate on it further. I certainly would, since it is contrary to what I have been taught and learned elsewhere. I generally find that when I am confused or not understanding, and I ask for clarification, someone can provide a source or logical reasoning. Such has not been the case here. That doesn't mean your lama is wrong. It means you have not been able to clarify it as well. I am sad to say my own Lama is indisposed tonight, or I'd ask his thoughts. I'll see him tomorrow, if I remember, I will ask him then. I do find it telling and perhaps critically important that there is a very specific term or phrase "afflicting emotion" (nyong mong) in Tibetan, which is distinct from other emotions such as empathy, compassion, and so on. I do not think the prolific use of the term makes sense if it in fact applies to all emotions. ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Sounds like a sense of self to me! The Tathagata referred to himself as such fairly frequently, even saying things like "I'm dying." You do not understand what non-self means if you think it means not acknowledging that there is a being doing a thing. If a wave is swamping your boat, it makes no sense to say "ah, but the ocean is emptiness." This kind of impractical reasoning is anathema to madhyamaka and indeed Dzogchen. Enlightened beings recognize their existence on the relative level, but they also recognize the emptiness of the absolute level. Denying the relative because the absolute is empty borders on nihilism, and is warned about in for example The Jewel Ornament of Liberation by Gampopa.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 01:54
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:The thinking with the four noble truths is that through lack of attachment to states, the states will fall away, not that they will remain and we just won't be attached to them. It is a certain perspective among many within Buddhism. There are other possible ways to go about the problem. Hope this helps This is true to the degree that attachment is a preliminary cause for the arising of further suffering. Without attachment, one does not generate sufferings in their karma field. The states fall away in that as they resolve, they do not re-arise. Ultimately, this continues until death. There is a huge amount of debate and controversy regarding whether or not a being before death is fully liberated (see then the distinction between nirvana and parinirvana). It's all kind of moot though, since that is a very Theravadan problem. It does not speak at all to the experience of living enlightened beings, or emanations, or beings who attain enlightenment in this very life. In Mahayana prayers, for example, the Seven Limb Prayer, we even pray that Buddhas don't pass into parinirvana, but stay to help suffering beings. Do you take this to mean that we're praying those Buddhas don't exist? I mean, the Buddhas exist, and they exist in a world we can interact with. This must mean that they share at least the same conceptual space as suffering beings.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 01:59
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Sounds like a sense of self to me! You don't have a great grasp of atman vs anatman. ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:And maybe emotions aren't tainted... but I am going to act as if they are until I can't push through any longer. I am going the distance, I don't give a gently caress. I want to be free of all the bullshit. If I overshoot the mark at first, so be it. This is my path. You all don't have to agree. But it's almost like I hit a nerve. Your precious feelings Remember that time when Buddha showed the world the Middle Way and those who would be his deciples went "Nah he had it right when he was an ascetic before that whole Middle Way thing #fuckit #yolo
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Because wishing to experience states without being attached to them is the wish for power. Having control over your surroundings. Being powerful, above all. I guarantee you that is not what happens lol drat. For a second I thought you were going to knock that obnoxious stuff off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 02:15
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Because wishing to experience states without being attached to them is the wish for power. There's a difference between the desire cling to these emotions without suffering (which isn't going to happen) and actually experiencing the emotions without suffering (which does happen). Just because you no longer suffer from experiencing them doesn't mean they still don't arise. Also, on a less theological note, you should really consider talking to Naropa's counselling services, since I think that's where you are. You really don't come across as very well and you've got some serious delusions of grandeur and infallibility going on that are as worrying as things can get by reading your posts over the internet, not to mention that combined with some of the stuff you've posted here makes me think you're aware of this fact yourself. Seriously though, you are basically lashing out at the existence of emotions while at the same time being highly emotional and claiming to be extra special and so far along in your practice that only you have it figured out. I think it should be fairly obvious to you if you step back and think about it rationally that maybe you need some outside help not with Dharma but with how you're coping things, because Buddhism in an attempt to reject all feeling isn't just unskillful, it's super unhealthy and it really seems like you're trying to use your practice to address some other underlying issues.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 02:21
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Because wishing to experience states without being attached to them is the wish for power. Having control over your surroundings. Being powerful, above all. I guarantee you that is not what happens lol Okay, sure, wishing to experience states without being attached to them is clinging. What if you just experience states, and you aren't attached to them, and it has nothing to do with what you're wishing for, because you're without grasping? What if it's not wishing to experience states without being attached to them? What if it's just experiencing states? Because that's pretty much what we've all been saying. I mean, the scriptures are full of dudes with miracle powers, but everyone agrees that trying to cultivate miracle powers is off point and wrong view, because it is an attempt to seek power. And yet, nobody says "miracle powers are suffering because if you want miracle powers you want power." That would not be a true statement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 02:25
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:And Lama Surya Das is far more diplomatic than me, don't assume anything about him because of me. I've only met him a few times anyway. I am saying what I am saying on my own. I don't know much about him but he seems like a nice, level-headed guy to me. http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/176174/july-14-2008/barack-obama-s-church-search---lama-surya-das
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 03:20
|
|
|
Holy moly! Well at least this gave the thread some traction, huh? ObamaCaresHugSquad, please look into some consoling services if you're getting this worked up about Internet people disagreeing with you. Seriously, you need some real tools to help you in the here and now, the path will be there in a few months when you're done. As for the, "Who is a Buddhist," debate, I always make a point of saying that I practice some Shambhala Teachings (Feel free of add me to the list in the OP as such). I do this because this is an evident truth, that is a thing I do. I can give people a list of resources to prove this thing. Once we get into labels it just starts to do more harm then good. Way back ObamaCaresHugSquad said that having a passport or Social Security Number would qualify one to say they are American. This is incorrect, what if this same passport holder was a member of a Communist Party, oh boy would there be an uproar then. To many that would be an unamerican thing to do! Labels are dangerous because at any time for any or no reason they can be rescinded by people or groups at large. This leads to a lot of suffering in the form of animosity and anger. Let people figure out for the selves what they are and are not, and how they view others in the world. It's a lot less trouble.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 08:15
|
|
Razage posted:Way back ObamaCaresHugSquad said that having a passport or Social Security Number would qualify one to say they are American. This is incorrect, what if this same passport holder was a member of a Communist Party, oh boy would there be an uproar then. To dance around this debate, labels do have use, to some of us they matter because as has been pointed out in the past people misrepresenting Buddhist teachings are both impacting access of (real) Western Buddhists to sanghas in some cases and, more importantly, are spreading false Dharma if they say that X belief is consistent with Buddhism. Not too many people here go off on theological nuances like ObamaCaresHugSquad, but I've pointed out to people that the core "requirement" for being a Buddhist is honestly taking refuge, and that it's inconsistent with the idea that there isn't rebirth or some handwavey notion of our particles being reborn which is pretty resoundingly rejected throughout all of Buddhist history. It's one thing to say "You believe in a Mahayana teaching and I am Theravada therefore you are not Buddhist" and it's another to basically take the root of the entire religion out, as some people try to do. I tell people that if they aren't concerned with labels then they probably shouldn't use them, because some of us are and it has real impacts on our lives and faiths when Buddhism is misrepresented, and if you earnestly believe yourself to be a Buddhist and are spreading False Dharma then you really should take a look into that (not directed at you or anyone in particular, just things I've seen come up in here).
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 09:02
|
|
|
WAFFLEHOUND posted:To dance around this debate, labels do have use, to some of us they matter because as has been pointed out in the past people misrepresenting Buddhist teachings are both impacting access of (real) Western Buddhists to sanghas in some cases and, more importantly, are spreading false Dharma if they say that X belief is consistent with Buddhism. Not too many people here go off on theological nuances like ObamaCaresHugSquad, but I've pointed out to people that the core "requirement" for being a Buddhist is honestly taking refuge, and that it's inconsistent with the idea that there isn't rebirth or some handwavey notion of our particles being reborn which is pretty resoundingly rejected throughout all of Buddhist history. You have pointed out how the mis-use of a label is detrimental. What is the positive aspect of the label? I wholly agree with the mis-use of labels being detrimental. The problem is it's near impossible not to mis-use a label. They can have many meanings, being a Republican at the RNC will be quite a different experiance then crying out that you're one at the DNC. Also, when we look at the views of even elected members of both parties we see they're all over the place! So now what? In this case the labels don't really help me figure out much, just that there's two teams and I can be a member of whichever Inlike and the other one is, "The Enemy," that doesn't seem very helpful to me. It wasn't helpful for ObamaCaresHugSquad when he had the whole thread making fun of him either.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 09:54
|
|
Razage posted:You have pointed out how the mis-use of a label is detrimental. What is the positive aspect of the label? The most practical example I can think of right off the top of my head is: "I don't drink." "Why?" "I'm Buddhist." If the label is meaningful: "Oh, okay" If the label is how it actually is "The hell? My buddy Dave is Buddhist Christian and he smokes weed 24/7 as part of his spiritual practice and is a borderline alcoholic". Basically it's useful in some contexts to be able to accurately summarize your beliefs to others, particularly as it relates to religious services.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 11:39
|
|
|
I'm aware this isn't the 'talk about meditation' thread, but there didn't seem to be anywhere else to post this and wanted to know if this was usual. Some background information: I'd been considering the political implications of the fact that there is no self. I'd also been reading Cyberia by Douglas Rushkoff and talking (briefly) with some anarchist/leftist activists I know; I don't fit in so well with them because I think moral and political ideologies are forms of unnecessary limitation. Last night before bed I meditated with the specific goal of reaching into the collective consciousness. In line with my belief that there is no self, I don't bother with breathing meditation. It just tethers you to the body. Instead I focus on removing all thoughts and feelings that might arise until there is nothing left. The usual sensations happened: I felt I was sinking down through a series of levels. This is where the weird stuff began. I started seeing visions and hearing dozens of voices talking, like a crowd. The vision that stuck with me was this: the entrance to a club called Cyberia (heh). Its appearance was something between a masonic lodge and a nightclub: out the front were two vast blue glowing tubes. I tried to get in but my vision stopped when I tried to go inside: there was just this very vivid picture that remained. Then I fell asleep. Except it wasn't exactly sleep. I woke up several times in the night. Every time, I was instantly aware of my surroundings, as if I hadn't slept, as though I'd just taken a pause from being awake. I woke up much earlier than usual this morning but didn't get any sleep grogginess: I just sat up. It was like I'd just lay down for a second and was getting back up. Anyone else experience this? Either the unusual visions or the extreme lack of tiredness?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 11:51
|
|
|
Mr. Mambold posted:Have you never seen an infant with an apparently full-blown personality? The reason why I think this is because in meditation, sometimes my personality fades away, but there is still a lot going on there which has nothing to do with what I think of as 'me'. So my reasoning is that the things that fall away in meditation probably don't get reborn; the things that fade away with stillness is probably just part of the brain's every day chatter. In meditation, the things that are there when "I" am not, these things are not concepts like 'life' and 'death' are, and I think that these things could very well be continuous processes without end or beginning. The Buddha's been right so far  These are just my thoughts so far though, I try to keep an open mind about it. As a general comment to the debate of the last pages: The Buddha posted:Monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well-spoken, not ill-spoken. It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people. Which five? Respectfully, I would like to point out that even posting on an internet forum is an excellent opportunity to practise right speech.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 11:55
|
|
|
Rhymenoceros posted:I think that the full-blown personality is part of the brain, and that karma determines your 'start out' personality. I like most of this except this part: full-blown personality is part of the brain which I think derives from our erroneous Western materialistic notion that the form creates the consciousness. It is never so, IMO. But yes, I agree, karma determines not only your start out personality, but heredity, environment, and the events that will shape that personality. And I've heard that that basically encompasses the first 35 or 40 years of life. We are talking about literally eons of karma reinjecting into an infant body. I do like that you mention that in meditation your personality fades away, because that is what is supposed to happen. And I'm splitting hairs here, but you know the process of finding the Tulku that the Tibetans practice- which I don't especially adhere to one way or the other- that's a little kid identifying stuff it supposedly had (attachment to) previously. My point, (which I concede won't go over well here) is that when the brain and body are recreated by karma, the personality also often transfers- if it was not annihilated before or after the previous death. In persons who do meditate diligently and achieve loosening of sanskaras of the personality, that personality disintegrates mindfully; becomes more an instrument of buddha dharma or the stillness, whatever you want to call it. In persons who have events of personality disintegration occur without a balanced regimen, you'll find what is called mental breakdown, which is a bit of a sideliine. Rhymenoceros posted:The Buddha's been right so far You know, that last sentence reads like just blindly following along, so I'm going to pick on you about it. If the Buddha was right all along, he'd never have allowed women and laypersons into the Sangha. It took Ananda's nagging for Gautama to recognize his error and correct it. Although the core of what he brought forth was diamond clarity and truth, do not think that buddhadharma was/is rigid or static. In his time renunciation was necessary, or he'd not have done it. Today, that time is past. /pick-on Rhymenoceros mode Rhymenoceros posted:These are just my thoughts so far though, I try to keep an open mind about it. Where's the fun in that? But agreed, it is an excellent opportunity for Right posting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 16:25
|
|
|
Guys I don't know if Buddhism is right for me anymore...I really enjoy meditating but what if I get into the teachings and it makes me an emotionless robot  the last four pages have confused me. Opposite of that however, this book that was recommended to me has made meditation a much, much more focused experience. I don't know what I was doing before but it wasn't even close to this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 17:34
|
|
|
Hey that's a huge misunderstanding of everything I was trying to say. I'm gonna PM you. Hey everyone else, don't pretend you know anything about me or my state of mind. Very few of you, if anyone, understood me correctly. And I think the suggestions for me to go to therapy are ludicrous. I am well liked at school, I've gotten offers from many teachers for recommendations, no one considers me crazy, I am considered helpful and insightful. None of you have any idea, so don't pretend. I'm going to clear up what I said for this individual, who obviously took some of what I said to heart, in a maladaptive way, and I feel remorse for that. And if anyone wants me to clear up why I said what I said for them too, feel free to PM me. I might even give you my cell. No way no how are you going to learn what you need to learn about the "way out" in this thread. I expect people here will tell you not do to this, but they have little to no idea what they are talking about. They are lost, walking circles in the dark woods, the blind leading the blind. They even misunderstand their own teachers. I like some of Mr. M's posts though. You should all listen to him more, even when he tells you something you don't want to hear. It will be good practice. I am honestly here to help. Please understand that. I will not lecture you. I can help, maybe only in a small way, but that's better than nothing. There's an arc, from being cut off from emotions, to working with emotions directly, to feeling their full weight, and finally to transcending them (sublimating them). No way and no how do you want to stay at the first step. I can help. the worst thing is fucked around with this message at 18:16 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Claes Oldenburger posted:Guys I don't know if Buddhism is right for me anymore...I really enjoy meditating but what if I get into the teachings and it makes me an emotionless robot The teachings, when properly applied, will not make you an emotionless robot at all. They will give you the tools to ease the suffering you feel in your life. That very lack of suffering is immensely liberating. Take it slow and realize that you are on a very good course if you are meditating along with that book. It would be a good idea to look for a local teacher or center at some point but for now you are on the right track. Glad the book is helpful. It really helped things click for me in a way no other meditation guide did at the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Hey that's a huge misunderstanding of everything I was trying to say. I'm gonna PM you. Hey everyone else, don't pretend you know anything about me or my state of mind. Very few of you, if anyone, understood me correctly. And I think the suggestions for me to go to therapy are ludicrous. I am well liked at school, I've gotten offers from many teachers for recommendations, no one considers me crazy, I am considered helpful and insightful. None of you have any idea, so don't pretend. I'm going to clear up what I said for this individual, who obviously took some of what I said to heart, in a maladaptive way, and I feel remorse for that. Keep in mind I know nothing about Buddhism and that's probably the cause for misunderstanding. Thanks for the PM. Prickly Pete posted:The teachings, when properly applied, will not make you an emotionless robot at all. They will give you the tools to ease the suffering you feel in your life. That very lack of suffering is immensely liberating. Thanks! That's sort of the loose goal for now, go through this and then seek a local teacher. It certainly is making things click. Claes Oldenburger fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 18:20
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Hey that's a huge misunderstanding of everything I was trying to say. I'm gonna PM you. Hey everyone else, don't pretend you know anything about me or my state of mind. Very few of you, if anyone, understood me correctly. And I think the suggestions for me to go to therapy are ludicrous. I am well liked at school, I've gotten offers from many teachers for recommendations, no one considers me crazy, I am considered helpful and insightful. None of you have any idea, so don't pretend. I'm going to clear up what I said for this individual, who obviously took some of what I said to heart, in a maladaptive way, and I feel remorse for that. ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:Please stop attempting to back up your case with "all these people said this". It makes no difference to me how many people said something. This is you trying to hide in the crowd. It is a common tactic among fools.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
I might as well use the kind of logic that you people listen to, shouldn't I? Just this once, at least. I'm sick of people being quick to judge using tangential statements based on strawmen. That's most of what transpired in the past few pages. I made my arguments clearly and they were still misunderstood. I even said "don't suppress emotions" pages ago and it was ignored. What was the point of your post anyway, buried alive? Why don't you say something about it? Be honest, and not just inflammatory like the rest of the clique has been trying to be. Emptyquoting is bad form. the worst thing is fucked around with this message at 18:43 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
If nobody is understanding your arguments, it is a pretty good indication that they are not being made well. Or you could just assume that you know the one-true-path™ and none of the people in the thread are wise enough go understand you. If I had to take a guess I'd say your conclusion is pretty obvious.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 18:44
|
|
|
Prickly Pete posted:If nobody is understanding your arguments, it is a pretty good indication that they are not being made well. That's why this so frustrating. I rarely say "this is true because it's true". I make a logical case for it. You aren't my target here, your faculties are limited apparently. For instance, you, for pages, demanded to see a Mahayana teaching said by the Buddha himself. That is a ridiculously stupid thing to continue to ask for. And you didn't correct me when I said Talmud instead of Torah, that was funny. You even quoted it. And asking for "evidence" instead of thinking it over yourself is generally the mark of a fool in my experience. Think for yourself. Don't ask to be spoonfed. the worst thing is fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 18:47
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:
I asked for some textual evidence for your claims, which of course you could not provide. And asking for a Mahayana sutra said to contain the teachings of the Buddha is not ridiculous at all, given that Mayahan schools attribute plenty of sutras to the Buddha. I am sure you are familiar with the Diamond sutra. Asking for evidence is a sign of critical thought. If I wanted to be spoonfed I would just blindly accept this twisted version of the Dhamma you are claiming as the true, correct path. quote:And you didn't correct me when I said Talmud instead of Torah, that was funny. You even quoted it. Yes, I can't believe I didn't correct your mistakes regarding another religion we weren't talking about. How careless of me.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
If anyone wants a print copy of Mindfulness in Plain English, for free, I just found one under my bed and will send it to you at no cost. I received a bunch of copies last year in order to donate to our center's library and this one was lost in the shuffle. And now I am passing the savings on to some lucky lurker in this thread. I can mail things for free from my work so it won't cost anyone a penny. First reply gets it. I'll probably have more in a few months so I'll try and do this again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
Prickly Pete posted:I asked for some textual evidence for your claims, which of course you could not provide. And asking for a Mahayana sutra said to contain the teachings of the Buddha is not ridiculous at all, given that Mayahan schools attribute plenty of sutras to the Buddha. I am sure you are familiar with the Diamond sutra. And the earliest Mahayana documents are dated from the common era. I don't consider them to be quoting the Buddha, just using his likeness as an allegory. That does not make them any less relevant to me. Buddha simply started a grand avenue of inquiry, he is not the end all and be all. Prickly Pete posted:Yes, I can't believe I didn't correct your mistakes regarding another religion we weren't talking about. How careless of me. the worst thing is fucked around with this message at 19:06 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:See? You're still doing it. I DID provide textual evidence. Remember the link I sent you? That dates the four seals to 1300 CE? Imagine that! Yes, you posted a link a few pages later after scolding me for asking for textual support, which I acknowledged and read. That link also showed a different translation of the seal you were clinging to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:08
|
|
|
Prickly Pete posted:Yes, you posted a link a few pages later after scolding me for asking for textual support, which I acknowledged and read. That link also showed a different translation of the seal you were clinging to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
What everyone is confusing is the external manifestation of goodwill, and the internal state accompanying it (or lack of one). Doing something good for someone has all the appearance of a positive emotion without all the baggage of one, from an enlightened perspective. You just do what needs to be done to help someone understand, and no more. That is the fruition of the path. Everything else is karma flailing around, from this perspective.
the worst thing is fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:24
|
|
|
So explore your karma, knowing it is karma. Don't think it will carry you the whole way (but it can be exhausted). Just have a sense of humor about your states of mind. "This too, will pass".
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
I’ve been meaning to post a link to Sutta Central for a while now and I keep forgetting. This site might be of interest to anyone here who enjoys nerding out over textual analysis, the chronology of suttas/sutras, and the transmission of the teachings as the various schools diverged. It can also serve as an alternative to the sutta translations on Access to Insight, which aren't always ideal. Maybe that's just a personal preference but it is good to have options. You can examine any sutta in basically any tradition, and then look at its Pali, Chinese, Tibetan, and Sanskrit parallels. It is really fascinating to see how some things changed, and even more fascinating to see how the kernel of most teachings stays relatively the same across languages and time. This is kind of inspired by a project by Venerable Analyo, a German monk, who is using this kind of study to examine the Chinese Agamas in order to find similarities with Pali sources, and some of the suttas from older schools that no longer exist. This particular site was started by a few monks who are focused on “early buddhism”, including Bhante Sujato and a few others. Some of the Pali translations are from Bhikkhu Bodhi, so they are very good. This is pretty much the only place I know of where this many sutras are collected together and linked for easy comparison, so go nuts. edit: unfortunately it looks like there aren't that many English translations of the Tibetan texts which is a shame. They update this fairly often so hopefully that changes soon. People Stew fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:31
|
|
|
Prickly Pete posted:You can examine any sutta in basically any tradition, and then look at its Pali, Chinese, Tibetan, and Sanskrit parallels. It is really fascinating to see how some things changed, and even more fascinating to see how the kernel of most teachings stays relatively the same across languages and time. If there are any fresh in your mind, would you perhaps be willing to bulletpoint some of the instances where things did change rather noticeably? Or even in a subtle way that could lead to a different understanding? quote:This is kind of inspired by a project by Venerable Analyo, a German monk, who is using this kind of study to examine the Chinese Agamas in order to find similarities with Pali sources, and some of the suttas from older schools that no longer exist. This particular site was started by a few monks who are focused on “early buddhism”, including Bhante Sujato and a few others. Are there any books you could recommend from an academic angle which addresses this kind of scholarship on early Buddhism?
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
ObamaCaresHugSquad posted:I might as well use the kind of logic that you people listen to, shouldn't I? Just this once, at least. I'm sick of people being quick to judge using tangential statements based on strawmen. That's most of what transpired in the past few pages. I made my arguments clearly and they were still misunderstood. I even said "don't suppress emotions" pages ago and it was ignored. The point is to say that for someone who is lost in the forest, but sees the tree line, you certainly don't act like it very much. The most that can be said is that you are sinking to ad hominems just like they are and that you're misunderstanding them just like they are you. That doesn't seem to be the case. They get that you think emotions are pain/attachment/tainted/etc. They just disagree with it by drawing a line between attachment and emotions. Their observation being that emotions are things that happen spontaneously regardless of whether you are attached to them or not. It seems like according to them emotions are no more an attachment than your leg moving when the doctor taps your knee is an attachment. Attachment is its own thing which can certainly play upon emotions, it might even be an emotion itself. Yet for all that, "I want to feel happy" is different than "I feel happy." You deny this. Fine. Why? You've stated many times that emotions are attachment, that by necessity they are craving, or aversion or whatever. I think that I and most others don't see why that is so. Also to save you some time, I know I'm not a Buddhist, so don't bother with that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
Yiggy posted:If there are any fresh in your mind, would you perhaps be willing to bulletpoint some of the instances where things did change rather noticeably? Or even in a subtle way that could lead to a different understanding? I can't think of one immediately but I have notes on a few somewhere and I'll post them later today. quote:Are there any books you could recommend from an academic angle which addresses this kind of scholarship on early Buddhism? Here are a few things that you might find interesting. Venerable Analyo does research and writes with the Āgama Research Group. They have a list of publications in this area, specifically focusing on comparisons between Pali sources and Chinese Agamas. From Grasping to Emptiness is a great article by Ven. Alalayo. A Comparative Study of the Majjhima-nikaya is supposed to be excellent. I think you can find it cheaper if you look around. Sects and Sectarianism is a good read as well. I have skimmed it. It isn't as heavy an academic read but it is very interesting. The author is involved with the Sutta Central site I linked above. The Foundations of Buddhism is an introductory text but it approaches the early stages of the religion fairly academically and I think it is a good read. edit: I almost forgot, Satipatthana - The Direct Path to Realization by Ven Analayo is also an excellent academic treatment of what is probably the most important sutta discussing meditation. He writes very well. Since he is affiliated with a university in Germany a lot of his writing is freely downloadable People Stew fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Dec 8, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:07 |
|
|
Prickly Pete posted:Links Cheers, thanks for sharing. Its good to see a Theravadan perspective in the thread. No offense to the mahayanists and the vajrayanists of course, they just tend to have a heavier representation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2013 20:27
|
|