Dhamma Wheel Buddhist Forum

rahul3bds wrote:heard of shamana tradition? Entirely based on samadhi.

And?

so it was ascetic class who left the society to attain salvation and samadhi was their prime tool, is that so hard to understand?

rahul3bds wrote:so it was ascetic class who left the society to attain salvation and samadhi was their prime tool, is that so hard to understand?

And all the shramanas practiced samadhi? And none of the present day sannyasins, sādhus, yogis, and various Hindu monstic groups don't?

sannyasins, sādhus, yogis, and
various Hindu monstic groups don't?

oh if you call chanting om, hari, jay, everytime they sit for meditation, samadhi, then they sure are practicing samadhi

rahul3bds wrote:sannyasins, sādhus, yogis, and
various Hindu monstic groups don't?

oh if you call chanting om, hari, jay, everytime they sit for meditating, samadhi, then they sure are practicing samadhi

That really does not answer the question. So, you are saying none of these people practice samadhi and all of the shramanas before and during the Buddha's time did?

all of the shramanas before and during the Buddha's time did?

How do you think shramanas could have come up with something interesting to redicule the "thoughtles vedic mumbo jumbo" without resorting to samadhi?

rahul3bds wrote:

all of the shramanas before and during the Buddha's time did?

How do you think shramanas could have come up with something interesting to redicule the "thoughtles vedic mumbo jumbo" without resorting to samadhi?

The Vedas were a product of the Brahmins, not the anti-Vedic shramanas.

where did i say that? read crefully.

How do you think shramanas could have come up with something interesting to redicule the "thoughtles vedic mumbo jumbo" without resorting to samadhi?

rahul3bds wrote:where did i say that? read crefully.

How do you think shramanas could have come up with something interesting to redicule the "thoughtles vedic mumbo jumbo" without resorting to samadhi?

You did not say it -- The Vedas were a product of the Brahmins, not the anti-Vedic shramanas -- I did, and the reason I said it is because that is the history of your country.

by "something interesting" i meant Amoralism Fatalism Materialism Eternalism and all not the veda. or could you elaborate your stand a bit?

rahul3bds wrote:by "something interesting" i meant Amoralism Fatalism Materialism Eternalism and all not the veda. or could you elaborate your stand a bit?

At this point I shall bow out.

i was just stating the fact that in order to gain popularity anti vedic shramanas had to resort to samadhi to downplay the vedic authority.