How to deny Atman - Help defending Buddhadhamma

[Sekha]

- What is the cause, the reason, Master Kaccana, why ascetics dispute with ascetics?
- It is, brahmin, because of lust for views, because of adherence, bondage, greed, obsession and cleaving to views, that ascetics dispute with ascetics.

AN 2.38

what is the point of engaging into disputes?

[tiltbillings]

- What is the cause, the reason, Master Kaccana, why ascetics dispute with ascetics?
- It is, brahmin, because of lust for views, because of adherence, bondage, greed, obsession and cleaving to views, that ascetics dispute with ascetics.

AN 2.38

what is the point of engaging into disputes?

Probably none; however, there a point in trying to understand the Dhamma and there is a point in pointing out misrepresentations of the Dhamma.

[meindzai]

- What is the cause, the reason, Master Kaccana, why ascetics dispute with ascetics?
- It is, brahmin, because of lust for views, because of adherence, bondage, greed, obsession and cleaving to views, that ascetics dispute with ascetics.

AN 2.38

what is the point of engaging into disputes?

To clarify the truth.

The Buddha engaged quite frequently in debates. Of course, as it is recorded in the canon, he always won.

-M

[JD32]

Read Gopi Krishna's account to see what happens to meditators in a Hindu context. They inevitably reify what are undoubtedly arupa states as "God" and/or "Self:"

http://www.om-guru.com/html/saints/gopi.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/gopinterview.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Ajaan Chah's first experience of an arupa was powerful, but luckily he was skeptical about it. Buddhist meditative theory makes all the difference:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1oK4Vt_ntY" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[shjohnk]

It seems your friend is very attached to his view. There must be some strong reasons for this (I guess 700 million Hindus have to have some reason for being Hindus!) and it's unlikely he'll ever change his mind about it. Best to agree to disagree and get on with one's own practice. If the Buddha couldn't convince all of the Hindus he met, how can we? The best example we can set is practicing well, IMO.

[Mawkish1983]

If the Buddha couldn't convince all of the Hindus he met

At the risk of being facetious I HAVE to ask: Did the Buddha have a time machine? Ah, must be an abhinna (sp?) I don't know about

Edit: My understanding (and I'm probably wrong) is that what we call Hinduism is a rather complicated blend of Brahmanism a la Vedas and samanic ideas that the Brahmans may have adopted... some of which (as I recall hearing in a Bhikkhu Bodhi lecture) came after the Buddha, possibly as a direct response to the Dhammapada (I'm looking at you, Bhagavad Gita). I've not, however, studied ancient indian religious development enough to make a judgement, I just think calling the Brahmans 'Hindus' is a bit of a stretch.

[Paññāsikhara]

If the Buddha couldn't convince all of the Hindus he met

At the risk of being facetious I HAVE to ask: Did the Buddha have a time machine? Ah, must be an abhinna (sp?) I don't know about

Edit: My understanding (and I'm probably wrong) is that what we call Hinduism is a rather complicated blend of Brahmanism a la Vedas and samanic ideas that the Brahmans may have adopted... some of which (as I recall hearing in a Bhikkhu Bodhi lecture) came after the Buddha, possibly as a direct response to the Dhammapada (I'm looking at you, Bhagavad Gita). I've not, however, studied ancient indian religious development enough to make a judgement, I just think calling the Brahmans 'Hindus' is a bit of a stretch.

Yeah, one could say that, in a kind of technical way.

Or, one can say "hindu" means "over that side of the Indus river" (which is apparently what the English meant when they coined the phrase), which means that even Buddhism itself, not just vedic brahmanic and sramanic stuff is also all "hindu". Though, I prefer to write this as "hindoo" just like "boodha".