Agganna Sutta

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Post Reply
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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)?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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?
>> 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
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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?
>> 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
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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?
Last edited by Alex123 on Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by Virgo »

Alex123 wrote:because science has no evidence for it?
[Yet]
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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.
>> 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
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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?
User avatar
Virgo
Posts: 1546
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:52 pm
Location: United States

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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?
ImageI 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.
>> 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
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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.
>> 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
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by tiltbillings »

Alex123 wrote:
Do you put current science above Buddha Dhamma?
ImageThey 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.
>> 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
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post 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?
Post Reply