As this forum is "Meditation (Suttanta Method)" I thought I might shout my appreciation for the site "Access to Insight". Of all resources on the net, this is truly the jewel. A big special thankyou to John T Bullitt - the founder of the site - The merit this guy must have accumulated by making the Buddha's sutta's available to the world must be immense. he also knows his stuff about whats important....................
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/
Which brings me to the question. Is there room for a forum entitled Buddhism (Suttanta)? Restricting it just to meditation is a bit limiting as meditation was not the main priority for most laypeople that the Buddha taught and many of those people achieved Noble distinction.
Buddhism (Suttanta)?
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: Buddhism (Suttanta)?
Expand on what you have in mind. This might be the place for such a request: http://dhammawheel.com/viewforum.php?f=11" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;legolas wrote:As this forum is "Meditation (Suttanta Method)" I thought I might shout my appreciation for the site "Access to Insight". Of all resources on the net, this is truly the jewel. A big special thankyou to John T Bullitt - the founder of the site - The merit this guy must have accumulated by making the Buddha's sutta's available to the world must be immense. he also knows his stuff about whats important....................
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/
Which brings me to the question. Is there room for a forum entitled Buddhism (Suttanta)? Restricting it just to meditation is a bit limiting as meditation was not the main priority for most laypeople that the Buddha taught and many of those people achieved Noble distinction.
>> 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
Re: Buddhism (Suttanta)?
A view of Buddhism that relies only on the Sutta's and no commentarial viewpoint. Yes you are right, I should have placed it in that forum.tiltbillings wrote:Expand on what you have in mind. This might be the place for such a request: http://dhammawheel.com/viewforum.php?f=11" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;legolas wrote:As this forum is "Meditation (Suttanta Method)" I thought I might shout my appreciation for the site "Access to Insight". Of all resources on the net, this is truly the jewel. A big special thankyou to John T Bullitt - the founder of the site - The merit this guy must have accumulated by making the Buddha's sutta's available to the world must be immense. he also knows his stuff about whats important....................
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/
Which brings me to the question. Is there room for a forum entitled Buddhism (Suttanta)? Restricting it just to meditation is a bit limiting as meditation was not the main priority for most laypeople that the Buddha taught and many of those people achieved Noble distinction.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27854
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Buddhism (Suttanta)?
Greetings Legolas,
I can understand wanting to downgrade commentarial viewpoints to the level of opinion, but I'm inclined to think we already have some forums here where that is the case.
To wilfully exclude the commentarial viewpoints, you would have to intentionally exclude all orthodox Theravada teachings... I don't see how that would be practical. If the commentaries say there are Four Noble Truths, would we have to say there are Five simply to make a point of excluding the commentarial viewpoint?
When you think about the implications of the proposal, you'll see that forums like Theravada For The Modern World, Early Buddhism, the Dhammic Free For All and the Meditation (Suttanta method) probably already cover the kind of scope or discussion parameters you're aiming to find.
Metta,
Retro.
Are you seeking a sub-forum where commentarial viewpoints are specifically excluded?legolas wrote:A view of Buddhism that relies only on the Sutta's and no commentarial viewpoint. Yes you are right, I should have placed it in that forum.
I can understand wanting to downgrade commentarial viewpoints to the level of opinion, but I'm inclined to think we already have some forums here where that is the case.
To wilfully exclude the commentarial viewpoints, you would have to intentionally exclude all orthodox Theravada teachings... I don't see how that would be practical. If the commentaries say there are Four Noble Truths, would we have to say there are Five simply to make a point of excluding the commentarial viewpoint?
When you think about the implications of the proposal, you'll see that forums like Theravada For The Modern World, Early Buddhism, the Dhammic Free For All and the Meditation (Suttanta method) probably already cover the kind of scope or discussion parameters you're aiming to find.
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: Buddhism (Suttanta)?
Or are we going to ask for English translations to triumph over the Pali texts, without regard to the Pali grammars and idiom?
Re: Buddhism (Suttanta)?
Fair pointretrofuturist wrote:Greetings Legolas,
Are you seeking a sub-forum where commentarial viewpoints are specifically excluded?legolas wrote:A view of Buddhism that relies only on the Sutta's and no commentarial viewpoint. Yes you are right, I should have placed it in that forum.
I can understand wanting to downgrade commentarial viewpoints to the level of opinion, but I'm inclined to think we already have some forums here where that is the case.
To wilfully exclude the commentarial viewpoints, you would have to intentionally exclude all orthodox Theravada teachings... I don't see how that would be practical. If the commentaries say there are Four Noble Truths, would we have to say there are Five simply to make a point of excluding the commentarial viewpoint?
When you think about the implications of the proposal, you'll see that forums like Theravada For The Modern World, Early Buddhism, the Dhammic Free For All and the Meditation (Suttanta method) probably already cover the kind of scope or discussion parameters you're aiming to find.
Metta,
Retro.
Re: Buddhism (Suttanta)?
Are you?Sylvester wrote:Or are we going to ask for English translations to triumph over the Pali texts, without regard to the Pali grammars and idiom?
Re: Buddhism (Suttanta)?
Heaven forbid.
I've now too nervous to use the English translations on ATI, save perhaps for a few "traditional" translators featured there.
I've now too nervous to use the English translations on ATI, save perhaps for a few "traditional" translators featured there.