Page 5 of 13
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:02 am
by Alex123
tiltbillings wrote: Exactly, which means it is based upon what is measurable and observable and is open to being falsified. Science is doing science, not religion and religion is a poor basis for science.
Even today not all regions of Earth were explored, and not every creature discovered. Nothing to say about what creatures existed or didn't millions and billions of years ago.
What has happened millions to billions of years ago is not directly and 100% accurately observable today, nor is it fully replicable by scientists until they gain clairvoyance or have a time machine. Thus direct observation and replication of what has occurred and all beings that existed is impossible.
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:06 am
by Alex123
tiltbillings wrote:son of dhamma wrote:Also, due to my practical experience of the Buddhadhamma, I have seen pettas, asuras, and the devas of Catumaharajika, who are "tree spirits" and who also live in lakes and springs, and I have talked with and interacted with them. This I think means that I know at least of the Pettivisaya, Asurayoni, and Catumaharajika planes from personal experience.
with metta
But you realize that that is not an objective argument. It might mean that you need to have your medications adjusted or it might mean that you are highly suggestible, open seeing things because you really want to. It could be that what you are seeing are some sort of disembodied beings but there is no reason to assume that they are what you claim they are. The problems with your claim are multiple.
What about the Buddha who has seen these beings and hell realms (ex: MN130)?
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:07 am
by tiltbillings
Alex123 wrote:tiltbillings wrote: Exactly, which means it is based upon what is measurable and observable and is open to being falsified. Science is doing science, not religion and religion is a poor basis for science.
Even today not all regions of Earth were explored, and not every creature discovered. Nothing to say about what creatures existed or didn't millions and billions of years ago.
What has happened millions to billions of years ago is not directly and 100% accurately observable today, nor is it fully replicable by scientists until they gain clairvoyance or have a time machine. Thus direct observation and replication of what has occurred and all beings that existed is impossible.
There were humans millions to billions of years ago?
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:08 am
by Alex123
tiltbillings wrote:The thing about science is that it is constantly open to revision, thus Piltdown man is is the trash heap, but religion is not open to revision. Faith, without question, is all too often the basis of religion.
So are you willing to alter Buddha's teaching because you believe that Buddha erred in some things? Do you know better than the Buddha?
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:08 am
by tiltbillings
Alex123 wrote:tiltbillings wrote:son of dhamma wrote:Also, due to my practical experience of the Buddhadhamma, I have seen pettas, asuras, and the devas of Catumaharajika, who are "tree spirits" and who also live in lakes and springs, and I have talked with and interacted with them. This I think means that I know at least of the Pettivisaya, Asurayoni, and Catumaharajika planes from personal experience.
with metta
But you realize that that is not an objective argument. It might mean that you need to have your medications adjusted or it might mean that you are highly suggestible, open seeing things because you really want to. It could be that what you are seeing are some sort of disembodied beings but there is no reason to assume that they are what you claim they are. The problems with your claim are multiple.
What about the Buddha who has seen these beings and hell realms (ex: MN130)?
You did not read what I wrote, did you?
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:11 am
by Alex123
tiltbillings wrote:There were humans millions to billions of years ago?
I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case.
Even today not all regions of Earth were explored, and not every creature discovered. Nothing to say about what creatures existed or didn't millions and billions of years ago.
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:15 am
by Alex123
RE:
son of dhamma wrote:
Also, due to my practical experience of the Buddhadhamma, I have seen pettas, asuras, and the devas of Catumaharajika, who are "tree spirits" and who also live in lakes and springs, and I have talked with and interacted with them. This I think means that I know at least of the Pettivisaya, Asurayoni, and Catumaharajika planes from personal experience.
with metta
tiltbillings wrote:But you realize that that is not an objective argument. It might mean that you need to have your medications adjusted or it might mean that you are highly suggestible, open seeing things because you really want to. It could be that what you are seeing are some sort of disembodied beings but there is no reason to assume that they are what you claim they are. The problems with your claim are multiple.
Alex wrote:
What about the Buddha who has seen these beings and hell realms (ex: MN130)?
tiltbillings wrote:You did not read what I wrote, did you?
I've read what you wrote.
What about the Buddha who taught about these beings. Was Buddha hallucinating? Did He need his medications adjusted? Was Buddha highly suspectible? Did Buddha see what he wanted to see?
Do you deny what the Buddha has said because science has no evidence for it?
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:16 am
by Virgo
Alex123 wrote:because science has no evidence for it?
[Yet]
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:18 am
by tiltbillings
Alex123 wrote:tiltbillings wrote:There were humans millions to billions of years ago?
I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case.
Even today not all regions of Earth were explored, and not every creature discovered. Nothing to say about what creatures existed or didn't millions and billions of years ago.
Yeah, and we see that America's science education is in the toilet.
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:22 am
by Alex123
tiltbillings wrote:Alex123 wrote:tiltbillings wrote:There were humans millions to billions of years ago?
I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case.
Even today not all regions of Earth were explored, and not every creature discovered. Nothing to say about what creatures existed or didn't millions and billions of years ago.
Yeah, and we see that America's science education is in the toilet.
Do you put current science above Buddha Dhamma?
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:24 am
by Virgo
tiltbillings wrote:Alex123 wrote:tiltbillings wrote:There were humans millions to billions of years ago?
I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case.
Even today not all regions of Earth were explored, and not every creature discovered. Nothing to say about what creatures existed or didn't millions and billions of years ago.
Yeah, and we see that America's science enducation is in the toilet.
What science says changes all the time. When science says that humans have been around for only so long, it is not
proven, it is simply a tenuous conclusion which they have come to based on various evidence. The future is open to more evidence that changes things being found. Can this be denied, Tilt?
kevin
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:31 am
by tiltbillings
Alex123 wrote:
I've read what you wrote.
Then you obviously did not understand it.
What about the Buddha who taught about these beings. Was Buddha hallucinating? Did He need his medications adjusted? Was Buddha highly suspectible? Did Buddha see what he wanted to see?
Do you deny what the Buddha has said because science has no evidence for it?
I am not addressing what the Buddha said, am I? My comments were addressed to a claim made by a person who posted in this thread. There is no way his claim can be verified and for that reason it carries no objective weight. Alex, it would help if you stayed on topic.
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:33 am
by tiltbillings
Virgo wrote:What science says changes all the time. When science says that humans have been around for only so long, it is not proven, it is simply a tenuous conclusion which they have come to based on various evidence. The future is open to more evidence that changes things being found. Can this be denied, Tilt?
kevin
Tenuous conclusion? Not really. It is a conclusion that open to revision, as is all science. The choice of words here is important, unless we want Buddhists to sound like a Buddhist version of Xtian creationists.
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:38 am
by tiltbillings
Alex123 wrote:
Do you put current science above Buddha Dhamma?
They are two different things, dealing with very different issues. My comment was directed at your sad lack of understanding of what science is, what it does, how it works, and what its scope is and the sad fact that science is poorly taught in American schools.
Re: Agganna Sutta
Posted: Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:40 am
by Alex123
Please answer the question.
Whom do you believe more, the scientists or the Buddha?
When the Buddha was talking about Hells (ex: MN130) or when He talked to Devas and Brahmas - was that a lie?