Some posts have been removed for breaching ToS.Dhammavamsa wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:01 am Where is the post that this person pondera claimed to be an Arahant? So he was the Arahant in this Dhammawheel forum?
That he said attained nirodha samapatti at the age of 26?
Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
-
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Mon May 24, 2021 3:57 pm
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
Noted. Thanks.Sam Vara wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:05 amSome posts have been removed for breaching ToS.Dhammavamsa wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 8:01 am Where is the post that this person pondera claimed to be an Arahant? So he was the Arahant in this Dhammawheel forum?
That he said attained nirodha samapatti at the age of 26?
Deleted
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
The above sounds unproven or unsubstantiated. There is a Kathāvatthu topic here, with the impression the Kathāvatthu conflicts with some Suttas, such as MN 10 & MN 123.Dhammavamsa wrote: ↑Sun Jun 20, 2021 3:30 pm OP, Kathavathu was compiled by Arahant Moggaliputta Tissa and was then put in Abhidhamma Pitaka during the 3rd Council that attended by many Arahants. So its teachings are following the Suttanta orthodoxy.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
-
- Posts: 1785
- Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
Sooo... the Buddha's teaching was incomplete?Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 7:13 am Regarding the Pudgalavādins, their concept of a “person” was that it wasn’t any kind of atta. It was more of a real paññatti. As such simply referring to suttas which deny an atta wouldn’t have been enough, despite this being an implication of their position. The counter argument would have to have been much more systematic. Only a competent Abhidhammika such as the most Venerable Moggaliputtatissa could properly debate them. I would also include the Sarvāstivādin elders here too. If a Pudgalavādin elder were alive today they would make short work of some of the more amateurish Suttavādin arguments we have seen so far in this thread.
It seems that personal attacks are a constant theme with Abhidhamma proponents.
The faux outrage that splurges out when people question the validity of their precious teachings while systematically undermining the Buddha and his teachings is a sad reflection on how the Buddha's words have been demoted to 'needing to be explained'... apparently with tomes as dry as a valley of bones.
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
I don't consider this a question worth my time. I think it was asked in bad faith, like the OP's bad faith wrong assertions that started this thread.BrokenBones wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 5:07 amWhich enlightenment factor does it activate?Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:11 amThat seems to be the case: gripes about the old translation.Dhammavamsa wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:38 amA: "I think it's wrong because it is long and unreadable."
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
No, but the suttas aren’t full recordings of debates and Dhamma talks. When the Buddha debated Brahmins and other ascetics do you think said debates were as short as we see in the suttas? That the Buddha’s opponents gave in so easily? No, they would have been similar to what was quoted in the OP. The very thing you are criticising.
Another thing about the suttas, they were never meant to be read like they are today. Laymen and women would visit monks and nuns who would quote a sutta and then would explain it in greater detail. New monks and nuns too would get said instruction from the elders. For most of Buddhist history people didn’t just read suttas at home in a vacuum, divorced from learned and wise monks and nuns. Perhaps that’s why we see such arrogance in our time from the mostly lay folk who do.
It’s not faux outrage. It’s a genuine dislike of people who disrespect great monks of the past, which is made even worse considering those who do it usually are complete newbies yet think they know better than said Venerables or are people who can’t tell the difference between their own Dhamma and Buddhadhamma.It seems that personal attacks are a constant theme with Abhidhamma proponents.
The faux outrage that splurges out when people question the validity of their precious teachings while systematically undermining the Buddha and his teachings is a sad reflection on how the Buddha's words have been demoted to 'needing to be explained'... apparently with tomes as dry as a valley of bones.
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
-
- Posts: 1785
- Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
A simple 'don't know' would have been sufficient.Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 2:57 pmI don't consider this a question worth my time. I think it was asked in bad faith, like the OP's bad faith wrong assertions that started this thread.
Again with the personal attacks and the ability to see into another's mind... is there an Abhidhamma book on this?
-
- Posts: 1785
- Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 10:20 am
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
A lot of surmising going on with regard to the Buddha and the suttas... the Abhidhamma slipped in a few things like this to explain away their sudden/gradual appearance when they were plainly not in evidence at the time of the Buddha.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 4:21 pmNo, but the suttas aren’t full recordings of debates and Dhamma talks. When the Buddha debated Brahmins and other ascetics do you think said debates were as short as we see in the suttas? That the Buddha’s opponents gave in so easily? No, they would have been similar to what was quoted in the OP. The very thing you are criticising.
Another thing about the suttas, they were never meant to be read like they are today. Laymen and women would visit monks and nuns who would quote a sutta and then would explain it in greater detail. New monks and nuns too would get said instruction from the elders. For most of Buddhist history people didn’t just read suttas at home in a vacuum, divorced from learned and wise monks and nuns. Perhaps that’s why we see such arrogance in our time from the mostly lay folk who do.
It’s not faux outrage. It’s a genuine dislike of people who disrespect great monks of the past, which is made even worse considering those who do it usually are complete newbies yet think they know better than said Venerables or are people who can’t tell the difference between their own Dhamma and Buddhadhamma.It seems that personal attacks are a constant theme with Abhidhamma proponents.
The faux outrage that splurges out when people question the validity of their precious teachings while systematically undermining the Buddha and his teachings is a sad reflection on how the Buddha's words have been demoted to 'needing to be explained'... apparently with tomes as dry as a valley of bones.
Simple question...
In all of the Buddha's suttas... can you cite just one that points to a vast array of teachings in existence apart from the suttas?
Again with the personal attacks... does the Abhidhamma not have a section on sila?
After this exchange I'm done.
It's not doing you or myself any favours.
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
What level of jhana have you achieved again? Oh. That’s right. “Access”. Bright lights. Etcetera. Indeed. Sounds like Buddha dhamma to me.Ceisiwr wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 4:21 pmNo, but the suttas aren’t full recordings of debates and Dhamma talks. When the Buddha debated Brahmins and other ascetics do you think said debates were as short as we see in the suttas? That the Buddha’s opponents gave in so easily? No, they would have been similar to what was quoted in the OP. The very thing you are criticising.
Another thing about the suttas, they were never meant to be read like they are today. Laymen and women would visit monks and nuns who would quote a sutta and then would explain it in greater detail. New monks and nuns too would get said instruction from the elders. For most of Buddhist history people didn’t just read suttas at home in a vacuum, divorced from learned and wise monks and nuns. Perhaps that’s why we see such arrogance in our time from the mostly lay folk who do.
It’s not faux outrage. It’s a genuine dislike of people who disrespect great monks of the past, which is made even worse considering those who do it usually are complete newbies yet think they know better than said Venerables or are people who can’t tell the difference between their own Dhamma and Buddhadhamma.It seems that personal attacks are a constant theme with Abhidhamma proponents.
The faux outrage that splurges out when people question the validity of their precious teachings while systematically undermining the Buddha and his teachings is a sad reflection on how the Buddha's words have been demoted to 'needing to be explained'... apparently with tomes as dry as a valley of bones.
Where is “access concentration” found in Buddha dhamma?
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
The fake Arhant without realization criticizes the honest practicing Buddhist for only having "access concentration." Shame on the honest practicing Buddhist for having a realistic knowledge of his spiritual progress. He should be more like the fake Arhant and make a fake lion's roar.
Then he implies that there is no such thing as "access concentration" in the Buddhadhamma.
Then he implies that there is no such thing as "access concentration" in the Buddhadhamma.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
Greetings Coëmgenu,
Metta,
Paul.
If you're going to mock the position, show the Sutta where "access concentration" is mentioned.
Metta,
Paul.
"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."
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
I don't think that I have to, because I don't think that "the Buddhadhamma" is limited to "the words in the suttas." Neither do I think that "in Theravada" the Buddhadhamma is likewise.
Incidentally, there is no "access concentration" in the suttas.
Incidentally, there is no "access concentration" in the suttas.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
How do you know I’m fake?Coëmgenu wrote: ↑Mon Jun 21, 2021 11:48 pm The fake Arhant without realization criticizes the honest practicing Buddhist for only having "access concentration." Shame on the honest practicing Buddhist for having a realistic knowledge of his spiritual progress. He should be more like the fake Arhant and make a fake lion's roar.
Then he implies that there is no such thing as "access concentration" in the Buddhadhamma.
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
Pretty much answers the question. Why is a person qualified to assess other people’s claims of jhana entry and samadhi when he admittedly hasn’t entered jhana or samadhi?
Like the three marks of conditioned existence, this world in itself is filthy, hostile, and crowded
Re: Kathavatthu vs. Vachagotta
Because I can know a fool when I see a fool. That's called "real psychic power."
More seriously, an Arhant is one without obvious displays of the three poisons. An Arhant is profoundly rare. An Arhant understands the Buddha's Dhamma. An Arhant has discarded self view. You believe that your cognition is your true self. You aren't familiar with the five aggregates as evidenced by your holding of that aforementioned position. You falsely proclaim yourself an Arhant, a display of at least two of three poisons.
More seriously, an Arhant is one without obvious displays of the three poisons. An Arhant is profoundly rare. An Arhant understands the Buddha's Dhamma. An Arhant has discarded self view. You believe that your cognition is your true self. You aren't familiar with the five aggregates as evidenced by your holding of that aforementioned position. You falsely proclaim yourself an Arhant, a display of at least two of three poisons.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.