Agganna Sutta

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Post Reply
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by tiltbillings »

Alex123 wrote: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?
Again Alex, trotting out the ImageThe Buddha did not do science, but science does not do awakening.
>> 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: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?
Again Alex, trotting out the ImageThe Buddha did not do science, but science does not do awakening.

Can you answer the question without ad hominem?


When there is difference between what the Buddha teaches and what the science teaches, do you side with the Buddha or with the science?

When one sides with puthujjana scientists vs the Buddha, how can one be a follower of the Buddha?
Last edited by Alex123 on Thu Dec 23, 2010 12:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by tiltbillings »

Alex123 wrote:
Can you answer the question without ad hominem?


When there is difference between what the Buddha teaches and what the science teaches, do you side with the Buddha or with the science?
You seem not to know what an ad hominem is. There is none, and I answered your question more than once quite clearly.
>> 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:
Can you answer the question without ad hominem?


When there is difference between what the Buddha teaches and what the science teaches, do you side with the Buddha or with the science?
You seem not to know what an ad hominem is. There is none, and I answered your question more than once quite clearly.

When there is difference between what the Buddha teaches and what the science teaches, do you side with the Buddha or with the science?
When one sides with puthujjana scientists vs the Buddha, how can one be a follower of the Buddha?

So when it comes to Agganna sutta, do you believe the Buddha or puthujjana scientists?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by tiltbillings »

Alex123 wrote:When one sides with puthujjana scientists vs the Buddha, how can one be a follower of the Buddha?
More trotting out of the ImageIt is not an issue of one vs the other. If you actually understood what science is and does, you would know that. You are way off topic here.
>> 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:When one sides with puthujjana scientists vs the Buddha, how can one be a follower of the Buddha?
More trotting out of the ImageIt is not an issue of one vs the other. If you actually understood what science is and does, you would know that. You are way off topic here.
I am on topic.
If one believes the Buddha, then Agganna sutta poses no problems. If one believes the scientists on that matter, then one can disbelieve what the Buddha has said in suttas such as Agganna sutta that contradict the science.

So when it comes to Agganna sutta, do you believe the Buddha or puthujjana scientists?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by tiltbillings »

Alex123 wrote: I am on topic.
You are off-topic and this will be the last time you are told this.
If one believes the Buddha, then Agganna sutta poses no problems. If one believes the scientists, then one can disbelieve what the Buddha has said in suttas such as Agganna sutta that contradict the science.

So when it comes to Agganna sutta, do you believe the Buddha or puthujjana scientists?
I do not see a need to choose between one or the other. They are dealing with totally different issues. The problem arises when one tries to make the other conform to it.

Now, this thread is not about me, so get back to the 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
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by Alex123 »

tiltbillings wrote:[I do not see a need to choose between one or the other. They are dealing with totally different issues. The problem arises when one tries to make the other conform to it.
About what issue does Agganna sutta speak?
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by tiltbillings »

Alex123 wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:[I do not see a need to choose between one or the other. They are dealing with totally different issues. The problem arises when one tries to make the other conform to it.
About what issue does Agganna sutta speak?
You tell me.
>> 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:[I do not see a need to choose between one or the other. They are dealing with totally different issues. The problem arises when one tries to make the other conform to it.
About what issue does Agganna sutta speak?
You tell me.
You answer it first.

What does quote below talk about?
"There comes a time, Vasettha, when, after the lapse of a long, long period, this world died. And when this happens, beings have mostly been reborn into the Realm of Radiance [as devas]; and there they dwell, made of mind, feeding on rapture, self-luminous, traversing the air, continuing in glory; and thus they remain for a long, long period of time. There comes also a time, Vasettha, when sooner or later this world begins to re-evolve. When this happens, beings who had deceased from the World of Radiance usually come to life as humans...now at that time, all had become one world of water, dark, and of darkness that maketh blind. No moon nor sun appeared, no stars were seen, nor constellations, neither was night manifest nor day, neither months nor half-months, neither years nor seasons, neither female nor male. Beings were reckoned just as beings only. And to those beings, Vasettha, sooner or later after a long time, earth with its savours was spread out in the waters, even as a scum forms on the surface of boiled milky rice that is cooling, so did the earth appear."
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by tiltbillings »

Alex123 wrote: You answer it first.
Sure. Pretty much the same thing that is going on in Digha Nikaya 1 and 24.
>> 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: You answer it first.
Sure. Pretty much the same thing that is going on in Digha Nikaya 1 and 24.

Here is how I understand it. The suttas do not deny the existence of Devas and Brahmas or what is said in Agganna sutta quote.

The DN1 sutta denies forming Self Views based on limited knowledge (or limited clairvoyance) about Devas/Brahmas.


What the Buddha known and seen was not a speculation for Him. So what He taught in Agganna sutta was not a speculation.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .bodh.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://tipitaka.wikia.com/wiki/Patika_Sutta" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
yuttadhammo
Posts: 144
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2010 5:03 pm
Location: Sri Lanka
Contact:

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by yuttadhammo »

tiltbillings wrote:
yuttadhammo wrote:In what way does it conflict with science?
Time frame; the process of evolutions; the assumptions behind the sutta story; those things that cannot be measured and so forth.
I don't see a time frame specified...

As for the process of evolution, it's important to distinguish between the evolution of a single being and the evolution of a species. Science says species on Earth are evolving; this is in no way contradictory to the idea that individual beings have been devolving - in fact, it's pretty clear that it is the devolution of higher beings that is leading to the population increase on Earth (along, one might presume, with the evolution of hell beings).

What assumptions are behind the story and what things cannot be measured? Are you being vague on purpose?
clw_uk wrote:Also, I dont subscribe to Rebirth being a part of Buddhas teachings
I know this sort of statement is fashionable among modern Buddhists, but really? Do you realize that removing rebirth from the Buddha's teaching means removing:
  • any reference to pubbenivāsānussatiñāṇa and cutūpapātañāṇa - the first of the three knowledges of the Buddha's enlightenment
  • Suttas like brahmajālasutta, bālapaṇḍitasutta, devadūtasutta, cūḷa and mahākammavibhaṅgasutta, etc.
  • Dhammapada verses like "anekajātisaṃsāraṃ..."
    etc.
Individual
Posts: 1970
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 am

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by Individual »

yuttadhammo wrote:If we don't take this story as literal, we will have to come up with some other explanation as to where we all were before the earth became liveable... unless we're going to deny the core Theravada doctrine of rebirth.

There's an argument for you, Tilt.
"Where we all were before"?
The best things in life aren't things.

The Diamond Sutra
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22286
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Agganna Sutta

Post by Ceisiwr »

I know this sort of statement is fashionable among modern Buddhists, but really? Do you realize that removing rebirth from the Buddha's teaching means removing:


any reference to pubbenivāsānussatiñāṇa and cutūpapātañāṇa - the first of the three knowledges of the Buddha's enlightenment
Suttas like brahmajālasutta, bālapaṇḍitasutta, devadūtasutta, cūḷa and mahākammavibhaṅgasutta, etc.
Dhammapada verses like "anekajātisaṃsāraṃ..."
etc.


already addressed in the rebirth thread. I wont post it all here again since we need to keep threads on topic
“The teacher willed that this world appear to me
as impermanent, unstable, insubstantial.
Mind, let me leap into the victor’s teaching,
carry me over the great flood, so hard to pass.”
Post Reply