No, that would be you.
You seem to think you know better than Mahasi, better than U Ba Khin, and the only person qualified to interpret Buddhaghosa. Kevin the uber-commentator. And you certainly think you know better than anyone else here.
And when you can't convince anyone you engage in circular argumentation.
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
chandrafabian wrote:
Now please tell me I asked you again twice, have you seen this?
Do you think that muslim woman had learn aggregates, bases etc..?
Which is an important point that has been made before. The practice opens up the learning of these things in a way that a dry, book alone learning could never do.
You know better than Buddhagosa.
We have been down that road, but then you never actually engaged the points raised that run counter to your point of view; rather, we get this snide sort of comment. The spirit of Buddhaghosa can be kept quite nicely, as has been pointed out, without a ritualistic obsession with a jot-and-tittle approach to what he taught. Mahasi Sayadaw and U Ba Khin have shown that very nicely in their teachings.
>> 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
No, that would be you.
You seem to think you know better than Mahasi, better than U Ba Khin, and the only person qualified to interpret Buddhaghosa. Kevin the uber-commentator. And you certainly think you know better than anyone else here.
And when you can't convince anyone you engage in circular argumentation.
No. That would be Buddhghosa. And all I repeat is all what he says.
Virgo wrote:
Have you attained the path of safety Tilt?
I would never be so stupid as to publicly make such a claim for myself. And what does this have to do with the discussion?
The stupidity was on my part. You are correct about that . Absolutely. The stupid thing I did was to think that Buddhists would always be prudent, and that, even if they doubted, they would not make harsh statements in this direction *just in case*. Yet, I have been proved stupid, because all I see here is you making remarks in my direction which will cause you to make bad kamma. I am not lying. This is the truth. I swear on my two eyes.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
