Colin Donoghue wrote:Buddhism has become very corrupted by false teachings, to such an extent that many of those thinking they are defending true Buddhism are actually doing the opposite. I'm not familiar with the details of this Dhammakaya incident, but I am familiar with the Buddha's true teachings, which most of you apparently are not. More clarification here: https://sites.google.com/a/veganmail.co ... rstanding/
This thread is about a certain religious organisation replacing the teaching of "anatta" with "atta", ie not-self with self. Most people around here are well aware that the Buddhas teaching is that the 5 aggregates are not-self.
A quick skim through this thread and I could not find the post that you've objected to, would you kindly point out which post(s) you think deviate from the Buddhas teaching so that it can be discussed.
Pronouns (no self / not self) “Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
Colin Donoghue wrote:The main point however is that to hold any metaphysical view about Self while still unenlightened (i.e. before realizing the full truth of it for oneself) is a form of delusion (one of the 3 Posions that keep us in Samsaric patterns of existence), and is not at all helpful toward acheiving liberation, which is why the Buddha in other Sutras remained silent when asked directly about the nature of Self.
So at one time a certain belief is poisonous and at another time after attaining enlightenment the same belief suddenly is the truth?
Last edited by Sokehi on Sun Aug 03, 2014 8:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Get the wanting out of waiting
What does womanhood matter at all, when the mind is concentrated well, when knowledge flows on steadily as one sees correctly into Dhamma. One to whom it might occur, ‘I am a woman’ or ‘I am a man’ or ‘I’m anything at all’ is fit for Mara to address. – SN 5.2
If they take what's yours, tell yourself that you're making it a gift.
Otherwise there will be no end to the animosity. - Ajahn Fuang Jotiko
Colin Donoghue wrote:I am in full agreement with the statements that our Buddha-Nature/Self is clearly not just the Five Aggregates, and that we should get to the real work of Buddhist practice and discard all distractions and distortions that hamper our progress on the path to gaining full insight/enlightenment, alleviating our own suffering and the suffering of all other beings; but the belief in absolute no-self clearly is an assumption made by later monks and scholars. Let us leave speculation and assumption behind and focus on the path to liberation, namely the Eightfold Path, and let us not skip the first step of Right View/Understanding, by claiming understanding of metaphysical truths that we honestly have no authority to maintain. Why can’t we be satisfied with the Buddha’s first sermon of the Four Noble Truths? Is that not enough for a lifetime of study and practice? Let’s take the Buddha's advice and not make assumptions about the full understanding of Self, so that we may be unheeded by wrong view in our progress toward enlightenment. For when we do achieve enlightenment then we will really understand the mystery of the Self, as well as why it is best to leave this mystery unexpressed to those that cannot fully understand or benefit from it.
The first sermon says that what's to be fully understood is suffering, its origin is to be abandoned, its cessation is to be realized, and the way to its cessation is to be developed (SN 56.11). You say we should be satisfied with this yet it seems like you're not satisfied as the gist of your paper was about "Self".
It also seems you are claiming the understanding of a metaphysical truth in asserting that there is Buddha-Nature/Self and claiming that enlightenment is about understanding the "mystery of the Self". And at the same time you say we should not make assumptions.
I see mixed messages here, that's all.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
tiltbillings wrote: Take a look at his linked blog thingie.
So he's spamming his own blog.
Pronouns (no self / not self) “Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
I figured there would be replies to my contribution being more examples of lies, irrationality and immorality (the toxic trio of Mara), like this one: "It also seems you are claiming the understanding of a metaphysical truth in asserting that there is Buddha-Nature/Self." I clearly say the exact opposite in my essay, I specifically say that I am not making such a claim; your comment on "spamming" is another toxic statement. Also in reply to another comment, the dominant view among Buddhists today is clearly a view of Absolute No-Self (I don't need to bother with multiple references to that idea made in this thread and elsewhere), which the Buddha absolutely did not teach, this being my main point which I'm sure will continue to be avoided, as is typical of those who have no awareness of the quality of thoughts arising in their minds which they choose to follow. The other reply about holding an unverified belief compared to Truth verified by life-experience (which is therefore no longer an unenlightened belief), shows confusion of terms and again that the main point I clearly made previously, and that I make in my essay, wasn't at all acknowledged (i.e. irrational diversion). Forgive me for stating more "general insults," I am actually just pointing to crucial truths that need to be understood in order for there to be progress on the Path.
Take care all, I'll leave you with these relevant words of the Buddha:
""Speaking in this way, teaching in this way, I have been erroneously, vainly, falsely, unfactually misrepresented by some brahmans and contemplatives [who say], ‘Gotama the contemplative is one who misleads. He declares the annihilation, destruction, extermination of the existing being.’ But as I am not that, as I do not say that, so I have been erroneously, vainly, falsely, unfactually misrepresented by those venerable brahmans and contemplatives [who say], ‘Gotama the contemplative is one who misleads. He declares the annihilation, destruction, extermination of the existing being.’" (Alagaddupama Sutta)
Arahang Samma Sambuddho Bhagava Buddhang Bhagavantang Abhivademi
Colin Donoghue wrote:I figured there would be replies to my contribution being more examples of lies, irrationality and immorality (the toxic trio of Mara), like this one: "It also seems you are claiming the understanding of a metaphysical truth in asserting that there is Buddha-Nature/Self." I clearly say the exact opposite in my essay, I specifically say that I am not making such a claim; your comment on "spamming" is another toxic statement. Also in reply to another comment, the dominant view among Buddhists today is clearly a view of Absolute No-Self (I don't need to bother with multiple references to that idea made in this thread and elsewhere), which the Buddha absolutely did not teach, this being my main point which I'm sure will continue to be avoided, as is typical of those who have no awareness of the quality of thoughts arising in their minds which they choose to follow. The other reply about holding an unverified belief compared to Truth verified by life-experience (which is therefore no longer an unenlightened belief), shows confusion of terms and again that the main point I clearly made previously, and that I make in my essay, wasn't at all acknowledged (i.e. irrational diversion). Forgive me for stating more "general insults," I am actually just pointing to crucial truths that need to be understood in order for there to be progress on the Path.
Uhm, no. You were insulting in your first post and and you're downright venomous in your second. I already quoted you contradicting yourself in your concluding paragraph and pointed out the contradiction; like I said, you're sending mixed messages. But clearly you're convinced you're not and who am I to convince you otherwise?
Bye now.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Colin Donoghue wrote:I don't need to bother with multiple references to that idea made in this thread and elsewhere
Umm, yes you do, otherwise you're not having a discussion rather just using this site as a pulpit/blog not a discussion forum.
Pronouns (no self / not self) “Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
gavesako wrote:
Apparently they hired the foreign scholars and gave them salary of 15 thousand baht per month to replace e.g. "anicca dukkha anatta" with "anicca dukkha atta".
Yes they hired the foreign scholars from Myanmar, Srilanka, Cambodia, also,...... but not to replace "anicca dukkha anatta" with "anicca dukkha atta"....
But to help them translate palm leaf manuscripts of Tripitaka... form all countries so they can understand and let all understand the perfect teachings of the Buddha... because every country have their own Tripitaka in their own language... so Dhammakaya hired foreign scholars to work together as a team and compare the Tripitaka from all over the world.
so Dhammakaya hired foreign scholars to work together as a team and compare the Tripitaka from all over the world.
But doesn't Dhammakaya itself mean the mental body or 'self' that is supposedly produced by meditation, as in this image associated with the sect? http://www.dhammakaya.net/wp-content/up ... budda2.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
18.8. Anattānupassīsuttaṃ - Reflecting the lack of a self
002.08. Bhikkhus, these seven persons worthy of offerings, hospitality, gifts, to be worshipped with clasped hands, the incomparable field of merit for the world are evident What seven?
Here, bhikkhus, a certain person abides reflecting the lack of a self in all things. Experiencing the perception of lacking a self, constantly, without an interruption, with a mind inclined to see wisely with penetrating insight. Destroying desires, ... re ... realizing he abides. Bhikkhus, this is the first person worthy of offerings, hospitality, gifts, to be worshipped with clasped hands, the incomparable field of merit, for the world.
Again, bhikkhus, a certain person abides reflecting the lack of a self in all things. Experiencing the perception of the lack of a self, constantly, without an interruption, with a mind inclined to see wisely with penetrating insight. His finishing up of desires and ending life take place at one and the same time. Bhikkhus, this is the second person worthy of offerings, hospitality, gifts, to be worshipped with clasped hands, the incomparable field of merit for the world.
Again, bhikkhus, a certain person abides reflecting the lack of a self in all things. Experiencing the perception of the lack of a self, constantly, without an interruption, with a mind inclined to see wisely with penetrating insight. Destroying the five lower bonds binding him to the sensual world, he waits to extinguish, ... re ... is close upon extinction ... re ... is to extinguish without determinations, ... re ... is to extinguish with determinations, ... re ... is one going up stream as far as the highest world of Brahma. Bhikkhus, this is the seventh person worthy of offerings, hospitality, gifts, to be worshipped with clasped hands, the incomparable field of merit for the world. Bhikkhus, these seven persons worthy of offerings, hospitality, gifts, to be worshipped with clasped hands, the incomparable field of merit for the world are evident.
Even if the flesh & blood in my body dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, I will use all my human firmness, human persistence and human striving. There will be no relaxing my persistence until I am the first of my generation to attain full awakening in this lifetime. ed. AN 2.5
This is pretty off topic and has nothing to do with the OPs question. But since this is isn't even accurate I think i should point out this thread here.
Included are literal copies of the 2015 critical edition of the tripitaka sponsored by WPD. You will find there were no such find and replaces.
Admins you should probably consider doing something about that DW topic since the title is demonstrably false. It looks like not everyone who read that old topic has seen the later one, which basically proves the claim wrong with actual copies of the tipataka version in question on the 5th post down of the second topic.
Thank a lot for the info.
Actually, I'm genuinely very glad and feel relieved to know there exist these information that suggest the tradition may not be pro-atta.
I say so, thinking their excellent on-going relationships with Myanmar monks, and their support for Burmese monastics, imo.
It is possible to trace back the debate on whether nibbāna is attā or anattā in Thailand to the year 1939. Before this year, I cannot find any record of either perspective. According to those who held the anattā perspective, a debate of this nature did not usually occur among Theravāda Buddhists but occurred between Mahāyāna Buddhists and the followers of Theravāda Buddhists. They believe that Theravāda Buddhism has always held that nibbāna is anattā but during the course of its history some people have decided to adopt a Mahāyāna perspective, which is contrary to the Theravāda position. In Thailand, those who held that nibbāna is attā have been in the minority. Having announced their perspective, some stuck to their position, others changed their views and stated either that nibbāna is neither attā nor anattā or that they only wanted to conventionally call it attā. However, for those who held that nibbāna is attā, the Buddha taught his disciples to discover their own attā by pointing out those things that are not attā. 5 Attā is discovered only through one’s own practice. Those who took this position saw that nibbāna is attā through their own practices and meditative experiences and were only stating what they have attained and discovered. Around the year 1939, definite evidence of a nibbāna debate is seen in a published work of a prominent young Buddhist scholar and a sermon by the Sagharāja. The young monk scholar later to become one of the most famous philosopher monks in Thailand was called Buddhadāsa. Buddhadāsa in 1939 published a work called อนัตตาของพระพุทธเจา (Anatta khong Phraphut-thachao) [Anattā of the Buddha], which argues that nibbāna is anattā. In the same year, the Sagharāja (Phae Tissadevo), the twelfth Sagharāja of the Ratanakosin period edited and compiled the writings and sermons of different scholars and published them in the book called เถรบัญญัติ (Then Banyat) [Therapaññatti]. One sermon given by the Sagharāja in that book argues that nibbāna is attā. It has been recorded that around that year a Buddhist newspaper opened a column especially for people to send their opinions about their views on whether nibbāna is attā or anattā. I shall outline the arguments of both Buddhadāsa and the Sagharāja and will present them in detail for some of the arguments they used are original and are not found in the contemporary works.
from:
Nibbāna as True Reality beyond the Debate (some contemporary Thai discussions) by Potprecha Cholvijarn
robertk wrote: ↑Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:41 am
This might be better in the lonv thread about Dhammakaya. Let me know if you want it moved.
Yes, agreed.
it's where it belongs, imo.
Definitely Dhammakaya:
For the attā perspective, the word nibbāna has three aspects. It is not only a state void of defilement, craving and suffering, but also the holder of this state, the nibbāna-dhātu, and the dwelling place of nibbāna-dhātu, the āyatana (nibbāna).Without nibbānadhātu where the state of nibbāna is situated, the state of nibbāna cannot exist; like goodness, badness, suffering and happiness, without the holder of these states namely human or animal, they cannot exist. This is the reason why nibbāna is named dhātu because it is the holder of the state of nibbāna. This holder of the state of nibbāna is then equated with dhammakāya that is attā. Dhammakāya that is attā is the qualities of those at the levels of someone who is between the ordinary and the noble up to the Buddha. However, only dhammakāya that has attained arahatta-phala is equated with nibbāna-dhātu and is the completely vimutti attā.