Buddhism cult

Where members are free to take ideas from the Theravāda Canon out of the Theravāda framework. Here you can question rebirth, kamma (and other contentious issues) as well as examine Theravāda's connection to other paths
ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby ignobleone » Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:21 pm

nibbuti wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Sorry, I have decided not to argue with non-buddhist.

No problem, friend. What is true & beneficial (Dhamma) can be seen by the wise for oneself w/o argueing, denomination or personality view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi).

:meditate:

The problem is, non-buddhist cannot see the Dhamma, let alone becomes wise because of Dhamma.
The reason I replied to your first comment is because I don't get why a non-buddhist tries to correct a buddhist. It just doesn't make any sense.

User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1627
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby acinteyyo » Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:32 pm

ignobleone wrote:
nibbuti wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Sorry, I have decided not to argue with non-buddhist.

No problem, friend. What is true & beneficial (Dhamma) can be seen by the wise for oneself w/o argueing, denomination or personality view (sakkāya-diṭṭhi).

:meditate:

The problem is, non-buddhist cannot see the Dhamma, let alone becomes wise because of Dhamma.
The reason I replied to your first comment is because I don't get why a non-buddhist tries to correct a buddhist. It just doesn't make any sense.

You don't neet do be a buddhist to be able to see the Dhamma.
Pubbe cāhaṃ bhikkhave, etarahi ca dukkhañceva paññāpemi, dukkhassa ca nirodhaṃ. (M 22)
* * *
"The Dude abides" - The Dude

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby ignobleone » Fri Nov 02, 2012 8:53 pm

acinteyyo wrote:
ignobleone wrote:The problem is, non-buddhist cannot see the Dhamma, let alone becomes wise because of Dhamma.
The reason I replied to your first comment is because I don't get why a non-buddhist tries to correct a buddhist. It just doesn't make any sense.

You don't neet do be a buddhist to be able to see the Dhamma.

Dhamma includes everything. Simple Dhamma is easy to see by anyone, but higher level, sublime Dhamma is not easy and not for everyone.

User avatar
Aloka
Posts: 4919
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2009 2:51 pm

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby Aloka » Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:11 pm

ignobleone wrote:Dhamma includes everything. Simple Dhamma is easy to see by anyone, but higher level, sublime Dhamma is not easy and not for everyone.


So do you consider that you understand "higher level, sublime Dhamma" yourself, ignobleone ?

.

User avatar
acinteyyo
Posts: 1627
Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:48 am
Location: Bavaria / Germany

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby acinteyyo » Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:22 pm

ignobleone wrote:
acinteyyo wrote:
ignobleone wrote:The problem is, non-buddhist cannot see the Dhamma, let alone becomes wise because of Dhamma.
The reason I replied to your first comment is because I don't get why a non-buddhist tries to correct a buddhist. It just doesn't make any sense.

You don't neet do be a buddhist to be able to see the Dhamma.

Dhamma includes everything. Simple Dhamma is easy to see by anyone, but higher level, sublime Dhamma is not easy and not for everyone.

This may be so, but being a "buddhist" is not a required condition to see higher Dhamma. I would say Mr. Gotama himself wasn't a "buddhist"...
Pubbe cāhaṃ bhikkhave, etarahi ca dukkhañceva paññāpemi, dukkhassa ca nirodhaṃ. (M 22)
* * *
"The Dude abides" - The Dude

User avatar
Paul Davy
Posts: 16138
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby Paul Davy » Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:39 pm

Greetings,

ignobleone wrote:Simple Dhamma is easy to see by anyone, but higher level, sublime Dhamma is not easy and not for everyone.

Oooh... be careful. That's how "Buddhist" cults start!

:rofl:

Metta,
Retro. :)
What is the final conviction that comes when radical attention is razor-edge sharp? That the object of the mind is mind-made (manomaya). (Ven. Ñāṇananda)

Having understood name-and-form, which is a product of prolificity,
And which is the root of all malady within and without,
He is released from bondage to the root of all maladies,
That Such-like-one is truly known as 'the one who has understood'.
(Snp 3.6)

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby ignobleone » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:33 pm

Aloka wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Dhamma includes everything. Simple Dhamma is easy to see by anyone, but higher level, sublime Dhamma is not easy and not for everyone.


So do you consider that you understand "higher level, sublime Dhamma" yourself, ignobleone ?

.

I never mean to say so. It's just for an information. Ehipassiko or just leave it.

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby ignobleone » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:37 pm

acinteyyo wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Dhamma includes everything. Simple Dhamma is easy to see by anyone, but higher level, sublime Dhamma is not easy and not for everyone.

This may be so, but being a "buddhist" is not a required condition to see higher Dhamma. I would say Mr. Gotama himself wasn't a "buddhist"...

buddhists = have sadha, non-buddhists = don't have
buddhist = Buddha follower, Mr. Gotama = follows himself? Please give me a break!

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby ignobleone » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:38 pm

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

ignobleone wrote:Simple Dhamma is easy to see by anyone, but higher level, sublime Dhamma is not easy and not for everyone.

Oooh... be careful. That's how "Buddhist" cults start!

:rofl:

Metta,
Retro. :)

Also be careful you need to be able to recognize Buddhist cults.

:juggling:

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6202
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby Cittasanto » Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:45 pm

ignobleone wrote:
acinteyyo wrote:
ignobleone wrote:Dhamma includes everything. Simple Dhamma is easy to see by anyone, but higher level, sublime Dhamma is not easy and not for everyone.

This may be so, but being a "buddhist" is not a required condition to see higher Dhamma. I would say Mr. Gotama himself wasn't a "buddhist"...

buddhists = have sadha, non-buddhists = don't have
buddhist = Buddha follower, Mr. Gotama = follows himself? Please give me a break!

so a non-buddhist can not have faith that there is enlightenment, a way to enlightenment, and those who have practiced rightly so can declare that path? I think the Jain have faith, maybe from a Buddhist perspective in the wrong place but they have faith.
“Mendicants, these two [types of persons] defame the Tathāgata.
(The mendicants asked) What are the two [types of persons]?
(The Lord Buddha responded) The malicious, or the inwardly angry, and the one with (blind) faith or the one who holds things incorrectly.
Mendicants, these two [types of persons] defame the Tathāgata.”
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
"Others will misconstrue reality based on personal perspectives, firmly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our personal perspectives, nor firmly holding them, but easily discarded."

ignobleone
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby ignobleone » Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:03 pm

Cittasanto wrote:
ignobleone wrote:buddhists = have sadha, non-buddhists = don't have
buddhist = Buddha follower, Mr. Gotama = follows himself? Please give me a break!

so a non-buddhist can not have faith that there is enlightenment, a way to enlightenment, and those who have practiced rightly so can declare that path? I think the Jain have faith, maybe from a Buddhist perspective in the wrong place but they have faith.

Please differentiate between "can not have" and "don't have". "Don't have" doesn't mean "can not have".
In Buddhist context, 'faith' means faith in Tathagata.
Of course if you talk about Jainism, 'faith' means faith in Jainism.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6202
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Buddhism cult

Postby Cittasanto » Fri Nov 02, 2012 11:22 pm

ignobleone wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:
ignobleone wrote:buddhists = have sadha, non-buddhists = don't have
buddhist = Buddha follower, Mr. Gotama = follows himself? Please give me a break!

so a non-buddhist can not have faith that there is enlightenment, a way to enlightenment, and those who have practiced rightly so can declare that path? I think the Jain have faith, maybe from a Buddhist perspective in the wrong place but they have faith.

Please differentiate between "can not have" and "don't have". "Don't have" doesn't mean "can not have".
In Buddhist context, 'faith' means faith in Tathagata.
Of course if you talk about Jainism, 'faith' means faith in Jainism.

That seams false!
it was a question in the guise of a statement, in other words there is more to faith than in one thing. The now underlined part above is a statement of faith both Buddhists and non-buddhist can have faith in. The Buddha had faith that enlightenment is possible BTW.
Last edited by David N. Snyder on Tue Nov 06, 2012 4:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: moderator note: posts relating to jhana have been moved to the great jhana debate
“Mendicants, these two [types of persons] defame the Tathāgata.
(The mendicants asked) What are the two [types of persons]?
(The Lord Buddha responded) The malicious, or the inwardly angry, and the one with (blind) faith or the one who holds things incorrectly.
Mendicants, these two [types of persons] defame the Tathāgata.”
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
"Others will misconstrue reality based on personal perspectives, firmly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our personal perspectives, nor firmly holding them, but easily discarded."


Return to “Fringe Theravāda Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 39 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine