Anomalous Phenomena/"The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

An open and inclusive investigation into Buddhism and spiritual cultivation

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Raksha » Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:08 am

Alex123 wrote:Why can't people who possess super powers show them to more people and put materialist worldview into doubt?

The world would probably see nothing at all. I once sat a long conference table at the meeting of a Buddhist charity and an elderly monk put a bronze Buddha image on the table. The bronze statue then turned to briefly glance at one of the people present. I began to sweat profusely and shake from head to toe with terror. I looked up and saw that two others present were in a similar state of shock but the other dozen people saw absolutely nothing, even though it was right under their noses.
So what is out there beyond our perception? My guess is everything; dragons, ogres, wizards, magic swords and everything that ever been written, and then some more! What we have instead is this dire consensus reality supported by the feverish desires of billions who project this 'reality', and wow is it strong. This is Mara's realm. Who can step out of line and say excuse me legions of Mara, and the combined magic power of the projected false desires of every living being on this world since the dawn of time, but I would like to prove you all wrong. I will now demonstrate that the very fabric on which your world is based is as empty as the sky, a dream, or a tall story that you once heard, and oh, by the way sorry if you die of shock or become mentally deranged. There was one person I can think of who had the power, compassion and skill to step out of line in this way and challenge the entire universe, slashing open this tangled web of misery and lies to reveal the Truth...Prince Gautama, Sage of the Sakyas.
Last edited by Raksha on Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:51 am, edited 5 times in total.
Raksha
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 11:30 pm

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby James the Giant » Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:33 am

Raksha wrote: I once sat a long conference table at the meeting of a Buddhist charity and an elderly monk put a bronze Buddha image on the table and then it turned to briefly glance at one of the people present. I began to sweat profusely and shake from head to toe with terror. I looked up and saw that two others present were also in a state of shock but the other dozen people present saw absolutely nothing out of the ordinary, even though it was right under their noses.

Maybe they thought the bronze statue was quite normal? Why were you and the other two people in terror? I don't understand.
Then,
saturated with joy,
you will put an end to suffering and stress.
SN 9.11
User avatar
James the Giant
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:41 am
Location: Perth, Australia

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby DAWN » Fri Nov 09, 2012 10:51 am

Cittasanto wrote:Dawn
I have seen the experiment before, but that doesn't equate to what you are saying.


I post this vidio to answer on your doubts about action of consiciosness in quantum physics. This vidio talks about Intrication, and Superposition to, because before the observator verify, we dont know the statement of dhamma, so he is in superposition.

You can not say if it works or not, because you have never try.

So dont believ me, i have nothing to proove, but when you will try, and see it by your own, you will change.

The difference between an practitioner, and an talker, is that one practitioner see The Dhamma, see the cause of dhammas, see the birth of dhammas, see death of dhammas. A talker dont practice, so he dont see The Dhamma, he dont see the cause of dhammas, he dont see birth of dhammas, he dont see death of dhammas, so he still talking.

When you will see the cause of dhammas, the birth of dhammas, the death of dhammas, by your own eyes, you will stop be sceptic about The Dhamma.

Regards, and Metta, a lot of Metta
Sabbe dhamma anatta
We are not concurents...
I'am sorry for my english
User avatar
DAWN
 
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 5:22 pm

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Cittasanto » Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:39 am

dawn
Actually I can say if it does or does not work, and whether or not I have tried something is not in your knowledge.
You obviously didn't read the whole post and resorting to ad homminum and twisting what is said still doesn't address anything actually said.

DAWN wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:Dawn
I have seen the experiment before, but that doesn't equate to what you are saying.


I post this vidio to answer on your doubts about action of consiciosness in quantum physics. This vidio talks about Intrication, and Superposition to, because before the observator verify, we dont know the statement of dhamma, so he is in superposition.

You can not say if it works or not, because you have never try.

So dont believ me, i have nothing to proove, but when you will try, and see it by your own, you will change.

The difference between an practitioner, and an talker, is that one practitioner see The Dhamma, see the cause of dhammas, see the birth of dhammas, see death of dhammas. A talker dont practice, so he dont see The Dhamma, he dont see the cause of dhammas, he dont see birth of dhammas, he dont see death of dhammas, so he still talking.

When you will see the cause of dhammas, the birth of dhammas, the death of dhammas, by your own eyes, you will stop be sceptic about The Dhamma.

Regards, and Metta, a lot of Metta
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5688
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Yana » Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:57 am

James the Giant wrote:
Raksha wrote: I once sat a long conference table at the meeting of a Buddhist charity and an elderly monk put a bronze Buddha image on the table and then it turned to briefly glance at one of the people present. I began to sweat profusely and shake from head to toe with terror. I looked up and saw that two others present were also in a state of shock but the other dozen people present saw absolutely nothing out of the ordinary, even though it was right under their noses.

Maybe they thought the bronze statue was quite normal? Why were you and the other two people in terror? I don't understand.


..*cough* batteries uh *cough*cough*
Life is preparing for Death
Yana
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:45 am

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby appicchato » Fri Nov 09, 2012 1:49 pm


..*cough* batteries uh *cough*cough*


+1
User avatar
appicchato
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Sambojjhanga » Fri Nov 09, 2012 3:03 pm

Yana wrote:
James the Giant wrote:
Raksha wrote: I once sat a long conference table at the meeting of a Buddhist charity and an elderly monk put a bronze Buddha image on the table and then it turned to briefly glance at one of the people present. I began to sweat profusely and shake from head to toe with terror. I looked up and saw that two others present were also in a state of shock but the other dozen people present saw absolutely nothing out of the ordinary, even though it was right under their noses.

Maybe they thought the bronze statue was quite normal? Why were you and the other two people in terror? I don't understand.


..*cough* batteries uh *cough*cough*


Raksha, this is why it's best to not speak of such things.

For those who know, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible.

Metta!

:anjali:
Sabba rasam dhammaraso jinati
The flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors
User avatar
Sambojjhanga
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:51 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Cittasanto » Fri Nov 09, 2012 4:24 pm

Sambojjhanga wrote:
Raksha, this is why it's best to not speak of such things.

For those who know, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible.

Metta!

:anjali:


That is like saying
For those who know math, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't know math, math can not be taught or demonstrated.

the main thing is that no one has demonstrated to people who are offering prizes (since Houdini) through demonstrable ways which can not be explained in any other way the possibility of such abilities. leads to the conclusion of keck y vooar
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5688
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby LonesomeYogurt » Fri Nov 09, 2012 6:41 pm

Cittasanto wrote:the main thing is that no one has demonstrated to people who are offering prizes (since Houdini) through demonstrable ways which can not be explained in any other way the possibility of such abilities. leads to the conclusion of keck y vooar


The Buddha himself rejected such silliness:

DN 11 wrote:I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying at Nalanda in Pavarika's mango grove. Then Kevatta the householder approached the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, this Nalanda is powerful, both prosperous and populous, filled with people who have faith in the Blessed One. It would be good if the Blessed One were to direct a monk to display a miracle of psychic power from his superior human state so that Nalanda would to an even greater extent have faith in the Blessed One."

When this was said, the Blessed One said to Kevatta the householder, "Kevatta, I don't teach the monks in this way: 'Come, monks, display a miracle of psychic power to the lay people clad in white.'"

A second time... A third time, Kevatta the householder said to the Blessed One: "I won't argue with the Blessed One, but I tell you: Lord, this Nalanda is powerful, both prosperous and populous, filled with people who have faith in the Blessed One. It would be good if the Blessed One were to direct a monk to display a miracle of psychic power from his superior human state so that Nalanda would to an even greater extent have faith in the Blessed One."

A third time, the Blessed One said to Kevatta the householder, "Kevatta, I don't teach the monks in this way: 'Come, monks, display a miracle of psychic power to the lay people clad in white.'

"Kevatta, there are these three miracles that I have declared, having directly known and realized them for myself. Which three? The miracle of psychic power, the miracle of telepathy, and the miracle of instruction.


He goes on to state that such miracles are not likely to bring people to anything but either a superficial faith or defensive skepticism, going to far as to say: "Seeing this drawback to the miracle of psychic power, Kevatta, I feel horrified, humiliated, and disgusted with the miracle of psychic power."

The true miracle is the teaching of the Dhamma, which is far greater and more beautiful than any worthless display of magic, regardless of whether or not it is "real."
Gain and loss, status and disgrace,
censure and praise, pleasure and pain:
these conditions among human beings are inconstant,
impermanent, subject to change.

Knowing this, the wise person, mindful,
ponders these changing conditions.
Desirable things don’t charm the mind,
undesirable ones bring no resistance.

His welcoming and rebelling are scattered,
gone to their end,
do not exist.
- Lokavipatti Sutta

Stuff I write about things.
User avatar
LonesomeYogurt
 
Posts: 900
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:24 pm
Location: America

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Sambojjhanga » Fri Nov 09, 2012 7:18 pm

Cittasanto wrote:
Sambojjhanga wrote:
Raksha, this is why it's best to not speak of such things.

For those who know, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible.

Metta!

:anjali:


That is like saying
For those who know math, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't know math, math can not be taught or demonstrated.

the main thing is that no one has demonstrated to people who are offering prizes (since Houdini) through demonstrable ways which can not be explained in any other way the possibility of such abilities. leads to the conclusion of keck y vooar


Not at all. It is more akin to explaining to a blind man what colors are or to a person who's never experienced love what falling in love is like.

BTW, I have no idea what "keck y vooar" means, I googled it but to no avail.

I think that one of the main reasons that tests like those proposed by James Randi haven't been taken is due to the fact that people who've experienced the siddhi's don't have the precise control over them that Randi designs into his tests. See: http://dailygrail.com/features/the-myth-of-james-randis-million-dollar-challenge

Afterall, Rashka witnessed the Buddha moving, HE never said he caused it to move! Kind of hard to submit something like that to Randi's tests, no? I will say that what I've experienced has been in a similar vein and certainly not something I could submit to Randi's testing, not that I'm really inclined to do so in any case.

I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else of the veracity of such things. Rashka related his story, and true-to-form, he was met with derision and ridicule. Pretty much par for the course.

I know what I have experienced. I made the mistake of mentioning it here, on a Buddhist forum, where I assumed a bit of open-mindedness, considering people practice with the goal of Nibbana, something I'm quite sure that non-Buddhists often consider a fool's errand. I personally find the reactions in such a place a bit off-putting, but then nothing in Samsara surprises me that much anymore.

I would suggest to you that this is very typical of the history of discovery in our world. There are many, many examples of this in the history of scientific discovery, but one that comes to mind is the "discovery" of meteorites by Jean-Baptiste Biot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Baptiste_Biot Until he made this discovery, the Royal Academy considered such phenomena to be the reports of charlatans. As I say, this is fairly typical how dogmatic science can be. You might want to check out the work of Rupert Sheldrake and Jacques F. Vallee for more on the current state of scientific dogmatism. BTW, in case you don't know, both men have excellent scientific pedigrees and both are true pioneers and like all pioneers, are subject to derision and ridicule.

One final thing. Until I experienced what I have experienced, I felt exactly the way you do, so I'm not that surprised...though I will admit that I was not a practicing Buddhist at that time...just a strict scientific materialist. Something I've thankfully outgrown.

Metta!

:anjali:
Sabba rasam dhammaraso jinati
The flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors
User avatar
Sambojjhanga
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:51 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Cittasanto » Fri Nov 09, 2012 8:44 pm

Sambojjhanga wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:
That is like saying
For those who know math, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't know math, math can not be taught or demonstrated.

the main thing is that no one has demonstrated to people who are offering prizes (since Houdini) through demonstrable ways which can not be explained in any other way the possibility of such abilities. leads to the conclusion of keck y vooar


Not at all. It is more akin to explaining to a blind man what colors are or to a person who's never experienced love what falling in love is like.

BTW, I have no idea what "keck y vooar" means, I googled it but to no avail.

I think that one of the main reasons that tests like those proposed by James Randi haven't been taken is due to the fact that people who've experienced the siddhi's don't have the precise control over them that Randi designs into his tests. See: http://dailygrail.com/features/the-myth-of-james-randis-million-dollar-challenge

Afterall, Rashka witnessed the Buddha moving, HE never said he caused it to move! Kind of hard to submit something like that to Randi's tests, no? I will say that what I've experienced has been in a similar vein and certainly not something I could submit to Randi's testing, not that I'm really inclined to do so in any case.

it could still be submitted! just because HE never made it move doesn't mean there was not a form of hallucination happening, or the true causer of the movement could not be determined or tested.

I saw a test done by Randi and the only control he asked for was polystyrene packaging balls and all sorts of excuses were used the gentleman had enough control to do his trick in normal circumstances, and regularly but with the control he could not. There have been others to accept publicly the challange who have enough control to do it all day every day, yet they never got in touch.

I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else of the veracity of such things. Rashka related his story, and true-to-form, he was met with derision and ridicule. Pretty much par for the course.

if asking for evidence is ridicule what is twisting others words or ad hom?
Raksha may of been given a reason for the happening in a way you find ridiculing, but to assume they were actually ridiculing may be premature.

I know what I have experienced. I made the mistake of mentioning it here, on a Buddhist forum, where I assumed a bit of open-mindedness, considering people practice with the goal of Nibbana, something I'm quite sure that non-Buddhists often consider a fool's errand. I personally find the reactions in such a place a bit off-putting, but then nothing in Samsara surprises me that much anymore.

a claim with nothing backing it up is no more than a claim!
The problem you have here is that Buddhist Practice time and again under scientific methods yields results which show that claims are to some degree are true. this may not equate to enlightenment but it does show that there is a greater tolerance for pain, and benefit for mental health and stress at least and through such corroberated results a reasonable projection that can lead people to believe that the end result might be is true in some way.
there is the difference, a large body of anecdotal as-well as empirical evidence v's anecdotal alone with the addition of non-repeatable or flawed experiments or psudo-science in some cases.

I would suggest to you that this is very typical of the history of discovery in our world. There are many, many examples of this in the history of scientific discovery, but one that comes to mind is the "discovery" of meteorites by Jean-Baptiste Biot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Baptiste_Biot Until he made this discovery, the Royal Academy considered such phenomena to be the reports of charlatans. As I say, this is fairly typical how dogmatic science can be. You might want to check out the work of Rupert Sheldrake and Jacques F. Vallee for more on the current state of scientific dogmatism. BTW, in case you don't know, both men have excellent scientific pedigrees and both are true pioneers and like all pioneers, are subject to derision and ridicule.

so when empirical evidence is sought it is consistently obtained in a repeatable way?

One final thing. Until I experienced what I have experienced, I felt exactly the way you do, so I'm not that surprised...though I will admit that I was not a practicing Buddhist at that time...just a strict scientific materialist. Something I've thankfully outgrown.

and how does asking for evidence show feelings, experience or other?
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5688
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby appicchato » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:13 pm

What about the guy who bends spoons?...
User avatar
appicchato
 
Posts: 1560
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:47 am
Location: Bridge on the River Kwae

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Cittasanto » Fri Nov 09, 2012 9:50 pm

appicchato wrote:What about the guy who bends spoons?...

Uri Geller?
I think he has been refuted a number of times hasn't he?
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5688
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Yana » Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:00 pm

Sambojjhanga wrote:
Raksha, this is why it's best to not speak of such things.

For those who know, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible.

I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else of the veracity of such things. Rashka related his story, and true-to-form, he was met with derision and ridicule. Pretty much par for the course.



Hi Sambojjhanga,

Just to make it clear to Raksha i was not trying to ridicule him i was just trying to cheer everyone up including him! :smile: But would i believe him? Of course! A lot of people experience psychic/unexplainable phenomenons i am frankly surprised people are even surprised it happens..Raksha is by no means a laughing stock. :hug:

All psychic phenomenons are completely overrated..they are perfectly normal experience/phenomenon here in Samsara..and anyways it's easier and more common to experience psychic phenomenons than realizing Nibbanna.Now if i met an Arahant THEN i'd be speechless.

The problem for us Buddhists is not whether or not psychic powers really do exist?
It's not letting it hinder us towards our goal of realizing Nibbanna.

:anjali:
Life is preparing for Death
Yana
 
Posts: 397
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2012 8:45 am

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Raksha » Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:16 pm

Cittasanto wrote:if asking for evidence is ridicule what is twisting others words

Cittasanto wrote: they are quite literally speaking out of the wrong orifice.

Cittasanto wrote:leads to the conclusion of keck y vooar

Unfortunately, I know just enough Scot's Gaelic to be offended by this phrase in Manx Gaelic that means something like 'great big S**t'. So yes your words do ridicule others Cittasanto, and they are offensive.
Sambojjhanga wrote:it's best to not speak of such things.

I guess you are right brother. Thanks.
:anjali:
Last edited by Raksha on Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Raksha
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2012 11:30 pm

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby mikenz66 » Fri Nov 09, 2012 11:19 pm

Cittasanto wrote:
appicchato wrote:What about the guy who bends spoons?...

Uri Geller?
I think he has been refuted a number of times hasn't he?


And even lampooned by Pokemon...
http://www.gamesfirst.com/articles/news ... 1_3_00.htm
http://thegeedork.blogspot.co.nz/2011/0 ... rsies.html

Image

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
mikenz66
 
Posts: 10128
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Cittasanto » Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:47 am

Raksha
looking at the context these spinets were placed makes this twisting others words to be something they are not!

it is an animal, nothing great or big in there! although I probably spelt it incorrectly with the addition of an r. but I will point you to Stephen Fry!

There was nothing about others personally but what they do, it is speaking about Action not person. And in both cases referring specifically to those making claimes yet not willing or coming-up with excuses which are not warranted as to why they can not demonstrate them!

Raksha wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:if asking for evidence is ridicule what is twisting others words

Cittasanto wrote: they are quite literally speaking out of the wrong orifice.

Cittasanto wrote:leads to the conclusion of keck y vooar

Unfortunately, I know just enough Scot's Gaelic to be offended by this phrase in Manx Gaelic that means something like 'great big S**t'. So yes your words do ridicule others Cittasanto, and they are offensive.
Sambojjhanga wrote:it's best to not speak of such things.

I guess you are right brother. Thanks.
:anjali:
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5688
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Cittasanto » Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:52 am

mikenz66 wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:
appicchato wrote:What about the guy who bends spoons?...

Uri Geller?
I think he has been refuted a number of times hasn't he?


And even lampooned by Pokemon...
http://www.gamesfirst.com/articles/news ... 1_3_00.htm
http://thegeedork.blogspot.co.nz/2011/0 ... rsies.html

Image

:anjali:
Mike

I don't think bending a spoon would fare-well in the fights though!
This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!
With Metta
Upāsaka Cittasanto
Blog, - Some Suttas Translated, Ajahn Chah.
"Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."
User avatar
Cittasanto
 
Posts: 5688
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby beeblebrox » Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:00 am

Cittasanto wrote:Raksha
looking at the context these spinets were placed makes this twisting others words to be something they are not!

it is an animal, nothing great or big in there! although I probably spelt it incorrectly with the addition of an r. but I will point you to Stephen Fry!

There was nothing about others personally but what they do, it is speaking about Action not person. And in both cases referring specifically to those making claimes yet not willing or coming-up with excuses which are not warranted as to why they can not demonstrate them!


Hi Cittasanto, why do you use so much exclamation points? What do they mean? I'm asking because I'm always unsure what you intended to do with those exactly. I kept on getting the impression that you're shouting, angry or frustrated... but that can't be right, is it?

It's kinda painful for me to read because I grew up with my father always shouting down everyone whenever he disagrees with something. I don't know if you remember, but when I posted a disagreement with you a while ago... you replied something with an exclamation point. I dropped it immediately afterwards, because of that perception.

After growing up with my father, I have absolutely no desire at all to have any kind of discussion with anyone who is shouting, or who feel like that they have to emphasize everything what they said. To me, it only signifies that the person is a jerk. Not worth having a conversation with. I know that this might not be your intention... but just letting you know how your use of exclamation points might come across to some people on here.
User avatar
beeblebrox
 
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: "The Broken Buddha" by Ven. S. Dhammika

Postby Sambojjhanga » Sat Nov 10, 2012 4:31 am

Yana wrote:
Sambojjhanga wrote:
Raksha, this is why it's best to not speak of such things.

For those who know, no explanation is necessary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible.

I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else of the veracity of such things. Rashka related his story, and true-to-form, he was met with derision and ridicule. Pretty much par for the course.



Hi Sambojjhanga,

Just to make it clear to Raksha i was not trying to ridicule him i was just trying to cheer everyone up including him! :smile: But would i believe him? Of course! A lot of people experience psychic/unexplainable phenomenons i am frankly surprised people are even surprised it happens..Raksha is by no means a laughing stock. :hug:

All psychic phenomenons are completely overrated..they are perfectly normal experience/phenomenon here in Samsara..and anyways it's easier and more common to experience psychic phenomenons than realizing Nibbanna.Now if i met an Arahant THEN i'd be speechless.

The problem for us Buddhists is not whether or not psychic powers really do exist?
It's not letting it hinder us towards our goal of realizing Nibbanna.

:anjali:


Dear Yana,

:hug: back to you. You are, of course, correct. Siddhi's are real...and they can absolutely be a hinderance. They don't have to be, of course, but many get so enamoured by them that they become a complete and total obstacle of what (hopefully?) we are all seeking...Nibbana. In fact, I'm starting to let this topic become a hinderance, thank you for reminding me of that.

Metta,

:anjali:
Last edited by Sambojjhanga on Sat Nov 10, 2012 5:07 am, edited 2 times in total.
Sabba rasam dhammaraso jinati
The flavor of the dhamma exceeds all other flavors
User avatar
Sambojjhanga
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 3:51 pm
Location: San Diego, California, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dhamma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests