A new interpretation of the Pali Canon

[PeterB]

So to be clear Vinasp in your view an intellectual understanding of translations of the Pali Canon, or an understanding your minds reactions to those translations, is sufficient in itself to bring you to Enlightenment ?

Bump.

Why are we discussing Vinasp's personal practice and understanding of enlightenment rather than his theory?

Do you think that they are different things Nowheat ?

[Naga]

So to be clear Vinasp in your view an intellectual understanding of translations of the Pali Canon, or an understanding your minds reactions to those translations, is sufficient in itself to bring you to Enlightenment ?

Bump.

Why are we discussing Vinasp's personal practice and understanding of enlightenment rather than his theory?

thinking...thinking...thinking



I'm with PeterB here. Nirvana is the unconditioned. You'll never come to a full understanding through the intellect. Most of the OP's theory just seems to involve redefining technical terms. You can change the labels all you want, but you're just swapping sankharas around. He posits that there may be another way to enlightenment beyond the Noble Eightfold Path, and yet freely admits that he's spent a whole 20 years studying the suttas and never bothered trying to follow the 8-Fold Path himself to see if it actually works. In particular, I'm talking about #'s 6 through 8: Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration. Now I'll freely admit that I'm incredibly lazy and don't meditate as much as I'd like to, but it blows my mind that someone would be so obviously interested in Buddhism but have no interest in trying it out. I hope I'm not sounding too mean, but some practical experience through meditation would make everything so much clearer.

[nowheat]

Why are we discussing Vinasp's personal practice and understanding of enlightenment rather than his theory?

Do you think that they are different things Nowheat ?

I think they are dogs and Cocker Spaniels, PeterB. Theories and intellectual understanding are the Cockers, Enlightenment is dog.

Now will you please answer my question?

[PeterB]

My answer to your question was in my question to you Nowheat. But to spell it out, I think Vinasps theory only has meaning in terms of its practical application, not simply as an abstract theory. Therefore his theory and his practice are intimately associated. In fact inseperable. You are of course free to take a different view.

[cooran]

Hello all,

The original Pali is available and well understood by scholars and Bhikkhus in the Theravada Tradition. Many lay people take university subjects in Pali, understand it well, and also teach Pali. It is not a secret esoteric language. The OP has had TWENTY YEARS in which to study the original texts in the original language, but has chosen not to do so.

The Buddha specifically said there were no hidden teachings. Nothing hidden in the closed fist of the teacher.

This is not a 'new interpretation of the Pali Canon' - it is a personal foible of the OP, not Dhamma, and, basically, one would be better setting it aside.

metta and karuna
Chris

[nowheat]

My answer to your question was in my question to you Nowheat. But to spell it out, I think Vinasps theory only has meaning in terms of its practical application, not simply as an abstract theory. Therefore his theory and his practice are intimately associated. In fact inseperable. You are of course free to take a different view.

Ah, I see. I have a hard time squaring that with it being an "unloaded question".

[PeterB]

When I posed that question Nowheat I had no idea that Vinasp did not practice meditation. I had not read his earlier reference to that fact. So it was a unloaded question. I was expecting to hear that his "theory" somehow refered to his practice. I was interested to see how. If I had known that Vinasp does not have a meditation practice I may well have not engaged in the thread at all. My interest in the Dhamma is entirely pragmatic. Not theoretical

[PeterB]

Hello all,

The original Pali is available and well understood by scholars and Bhikkhus in the Theravada Tradition. Many lay people take university subjects in Pali, understand it well, and also teach Pali. It is not a secret esoteric language. The OP has had TWENTY YEARS in which to study the original texts in the original language, but has chosen not to do so.

The Buddha specifically said there were no hidden teachings. Nothing hidden in the closed fist of the teacher.

This is not a 'new interpretation of the Pali Canon' - it is a personal foible of the OP, not Dhamma, and, basically, one would be better setting it aside.

metta and karuna
Chris

That rings true for me.