Buddha and Mahavira

[DNS]

Buddha is not a person, its a state, or more precisely that which illumines the citta and brings enlightenment, who forms a unique cosmology within the Individual but all are enlightened in the same source, but the individual may not change so radically on the outside, or they may change a lot, its not a monastic conveyor belt an full of stereotypes.

If you fix buddha as an historical figure then, it brings in all sorts of problems. Same as the other characters in the texts. Did they exists as human figures sure, but mogallana was moon or lucid side left side of our brain hemisphere which can become more profound and subtle, Sariuptra the right side of brain hemisphere, the sun lineages which again can be more and more bright and enlightened and Buddha exists as a potential in all us.

I am pretty sure around 90% or more of Buddhists in the West and in Asia, see the Buddha as a historical person (who attained full enlightenment). And I'd guess around 98% or more of Jains see Mahavira as a historical person (who attained moksha). Unless you are saying that they are wrong? And that could be possible as the majority view of something doesn't necessarily make it correct (argumentum ad populum).

[Sam Vara]

If you fix buddha as an historical figure then, it brings in all sorts of problems. Same as the other characters in the texts.

That may well be the case, but if you don't fix the Buddha as an historical figure, it detracts from the fact that human enlightenment is a real possibility. The fact that one human being completed the task by his own efforts, and that others were able to follow him by virtue of his guidance, is an important aspect of saddha, and moreover something that differentiates the dhamma from theistic religions. For those purposes, a metaphysical "state" or a concept is not good enough.

[markandeya]

DNS

Not to my knowledge and understanding and how majority of people sadhus teach and represent awakened Beings, that exist in the macrocosm and will include this reply to Sam, Buddha is not a historical figure, Siddharta was the historical figure the person, who attained awakening, he became Buddha, or realised the awakening in himself, when the citta expands or becomes aware of the potentials, Buddha is not a historical figure, its a potential in each and everyone and can be realised by anyone at anytime. Same as Mahavira, it was the translations that gave dates and made them into personalities. When citta expands into the supramental states in nikayas, mahayana, prajna states. Its the understanding of the citta, the microcosm or the limited being and macrocosms expansion into universal Being.

Buddha

some loose etymology

Bud~ awakened
Dh~ Held, concentrated
A~ BramA~citta

Buddha is when citta is held or concentrated in the awakened citta.

MahaVira

Ma~ Shakti#devi
Ha~cosmic sound vibration, a mantric sound in nada in macrocosm
Vi~inner
Ra~supreme enlightening force

Ha is also in the compound of Buddha

Texts where chanted, meditated on and realised as supra states beyond the mundane, not as historical figures, that came later, from both Greek and later translations. Cosmology is not well developed in the west, when this is simple knowledge of Being to many people in Asia. Foreign translations gave dates, and timescales. It doesnt mean siddharta was not a person, if he was or if he wasnt doesnt really matter when one is doing citta bhavana, where the potentials are aimed at being realised.

Same as Sariputra is from solar dynasty, He brings form , rupa to the dharma and is based on variables, tejas, tapas, agni, surya and other variables or light

Mogallana is Nama, Moon lineage He breaks form is nada sound, lucid without form, more mystical.

They co~exits as attendants of Buddha, which expand and liberate the citta from becoming birth and death cycles.

I was sent this today, not in relation to this post, it may help to shed some light, if its read objectively with open mind and for further research

http://www.pragyata.com/mag/art-and-cos ... j6tyhZX40o

You may also want to do some research in vedanga or limbs of veda, etymology in sound vibrations is one. Veda is not just limited to Hinduism or Brahminical caste. Veda is combination of nada and joyti, sound and light, to produce enlightened states vid, vidya vijja vid is specialised knowledge in supra mental states that reveal transcendence, vijnana vinnana.

But the division by sect, philosophy and so called belief has done much damage to the sadhanas and yukti, yogic methods of citta bhavana and twisted and made the language to empirical and intellectual.

Research at your own leisure.

with metta

[Dhammanando]

Ha is also in the compound of Buddha

There is no ha in buddha. The syllabification is bud + dha, not budd + ha.

To put it another way, the three consonants in बुद्धा are ब, द and ढ. The last gets romanized as dh, but the h is merely to show that the consonant is aspirated. It doesn't represent a separate consonant.

[markandeya]

Ha is also in the compound of Buddha

There is no ha in buddha. The syllabification is bud + dha, not budd + ha.

To put it another way, the three consonants in बुद्धा are ब, द and ढ. The last gets romanized as dh, but the h is merely to show that the consonant is aspirated. It doesn't represent a separate consonant.

Thanks for pointing only the mistakes Bhanta and not the overall post, but your study in linguists is incorrect, and again adds to the problems in translations. As I said it was loose etymology, because the real etymology is in sound, as I said compounds are not fixed, they are expanding and very deep, where each letter eventually will carry its own power but will not be in contradiction or divided by each other, they expand in the same substance. So I cant accept your translations.

The original languages are all in one constant flow. likemewritingasentancelikethis. You cant break it up in grammar and verbs, nouns and consonants with the original Sanskrit and pali or other ancient languages, English yes, but that doesn't mean anything. They are unbroken, expanding citta into the subtle macrocosm deeper than the subconscious mind, leading to full enlightenment.

Linguistics are very nice, but with sound opening in citta, which are usually activated by sadhus, or sri guru, sri vidya, who are one undivided force, they will not remain as usual langue, they have to expand, expansion only happens in akash, chid akash, spacial sound consciousness, in samadhi and dhyana. Sanskrit has its roots in sandhi, this cant be translated as its the prime language in true prajna states.

In fact there is no grammar the way the western scholars have translated it, its another manufactured way , due to trying to explain the system to a foreign brain, it may have some limited use.

The real way to understand these things will be by sound vibration, sound is nama, na and ma~ma is devi and light is rupa~deva, they form cosmic compounds in the citta which expands in citta bhavana, to produce enlightened states, opening one petal in the lotus one by one.

But for some reason the empirical brain wants to fit the ocean in cup, or all of space in teapot. This isnt directed at anyone just general comments. Dhyana for meditation as Dh~held and ya manifestation and na cosmic sound vibration of sri saraswati devi, who teaches veda in para vak, on her vina, vi~ inner na~cosmic sound vibration.

Non of this can be brought into English grammar, we can only make attempts, some of it maybe helpful to come as a study, but usually scholars fail because there is no bhavana in the citta Bha~internal feeling, va~cosmic voice and na~ cosmic sound or para vak, highest divine sound.

These are taught and transmitted in the ancient ways by sadhu, sa~so ham or Aham trans ~personal identity of unified oneness, dh~transfixed or held u~ in transcendence, using mediums of nada and joyti, sun and moon lineages in the macrocosm, to connect to Buddha awakened state which are finally liberated by devadatta who shatters all forms of monasticism for Supreme liberation, buddha, surya and chandra are powers of the avadhuta dattateya, dev is div transcendent, divyajnahrideyprakash. I cant write sanskrit on my keyboard.

It will always be an oral tradition, never a literal or tradition of grammar, the sanskrit and pali are better or r to be recited as musical notes that elevate the mind out of written concepts and intellectual understanding which becomes can dogmatic and fixed. All texts are brahmavada.

This should be common knowledge to Bikkhus which means ones whose mind has turned within, not monks.

with metta

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AlxO_DaQ0E

I am not in argument with you, whatever i write will be with some faults, because of the limitation of the dead language English in comparisons to ancient languages which were vibrations of divine sound and light., and also attempts to bridge the gaps between Vedanta and Abhidharma and bring these two traditions back to their natural synthesis. But some are desperate to keep them divided with man made schemes and isms, they are the real one dividing sanghas and traditions, their fate according to suttas is not good, if we are to believe them. All sentient beings are temporary, each one of us should consider that carefully, the powers of dharma will be totally concealed and protected by sri mahakal.

[AgarikaJ]

Buddha is not a person, its a state, or more precisely that which illumines the citta and brings enlightenment, ...

Thank you for taking the time to respond at length. I do understand your thinking better now.

Nevertheless, what you describe is a philosophical/metaphysical re-interpretation of historic personalities to fit into a specific cosmology.

In itself, I find those thoughts fascinating, as they add a dimension of meaning to everything. But in essence this is far removed from Theravada thinking, which, as others have pojnted out, stresses the importance that mundane beings are able to achieve enlightenment to mundane actions. This is, I guess, the fascination for many Westerners with Theravada as well, because it makes the metaphysical aspect superfluous and allows the Suttas to be read and re-interpreted in a prosaical, 'scientifical' way.

But as I said, I do share at least in small part a fascination of the (potential for the) super-mundane with you, so I appreciate that you shared your thoughts.

[markandeya]

AgarikaJ

Its not denying normal awakening states, or that we can start with normal consciousness and then gradually ascend, although its our citta/mind heart centre becomes more open to what descends into it and make us turn gradually from mundane consciousness to supra~mundane and ultimate consciousness. So I am not denying anything. Nagarjuna brings this more into reference, being the second turning of the wheel, where Buddha in the pali suttas is this supra-mental being in the subtle cosmos. And nagarjuna was expressing Being where both samsara and nirvana is one. Scholars make these divisions not Dharmavadins, or followers of the true Dharma, who ancient timeless.

This may take some time to go through, due to all the complications, intellectuals, scholars and religious differences have created, but essentially its a study of being, not philosophies, this Being can expand both upwardly and stay in this world. This was the southern tradition of naga realization, naga is when all nadis come to one point and citta opens into the profound, arjuna is the individual citta which can have five divine senses. Scholars have complicated this so much its a waste of time listening to most of them.

So how is samasra and nirvana one, in Sanskrit terms its jivamukta or the liberated being, who can act in the world, eat sleep and do normal day to day tasks, but his consciousness is in madhyamika, middle state, or wisdom states, which is always linked with the transcendent but works with mediums, full transcendence there is nothing physical, so works through the middle path where form and formless can merge.

The closest thing to this i have come across in the pali traditions is satipatthana and sati~upattana, where mindfulness of both in undivided state of the ordinary and the transcendent.

Everyone has the potential, we all have it, buddha is a potential in anyone and everyone, all sentient beings, its not just a potential in Humans, we have the potential to liberate not only ourselves but also trees, insects and animals, they can also liberate us, there is no limit to this.

[auto]

what you think is "I am" a tathagata?

[markandeya]

what you think is "I am" a tathagata?

Not sure what you mean auto

I am comes from Aham, its transpersonal oneness, not individual I am, the two dont mix at all. Aham is in the macrocosm, there are higher states above macrocosm, that is tathagata.

tat is a Sanskrit word for Absolute consciousness, there isnt any real translations for it, all etymology fails, but there are attemps

tat~ Absolute state of One

Gata and agata means thus gone and thus come, meaning existing here and there, all pervading Absolute.

They say Honorific Title of Buddha, the crown of Buddha

Avadhuta

doesn't seem that complicated to me, words can make it complicated, its beyond words. Best to focus on practice if words make it complicated, maybe some are waiting for the perfect explanation, the best book to read, how long does intellectual stimulation last for, how long can one hold an idea, if states are developed do they last longer, do they give more relief and bring more satisfaction. Words mostly get us trouble, often causing division, creating a me and a you and differences, some love this, some use words to end this, all mental ideas and concepts fall short in the end.

[auto]

what you think is "I am" a tathagata?

Not sure what you mean auto

I am comes from Aham, its transpersonal oneness, not individual I am, the two dont mix at all. Aham is in the macrocosm, there are higher states above macrocosm, that is tathagata.

tat is a Sanskrit word for Absolute consciousness, there isnt any real translations for it, all etymology fails, but there are attemps

tat~ Absolute state of One

Gatha and agatha means thus gone and thus come, meaning existing here and there, all pervading Absolute.

They say Honorific Title of Buddha, the crown of Buddha

Avadhuta

doesnt seem that complicated to me, words can make it complicated, its beyond words. Best to focus on practice if words make it complicated, maybe some are waiting for the perfect explanation, the best book to read, how long does intellectual stimulation last for, how long can one hold an idea, if states are developed do they last longer, do they give more relief and bring more satisfaction. Words mostly get us trouble, often causing division, creating a me and a you and differences, some love this, some use words to end this, all mental ideas and concepts fall short in the end.

thing is by following I am, the sense of it, i got to pinpoint its location and much more. Here people claim its not possible because self doesn't exist that you can't pinpoint it down.

i could get into an altered state, and rise the Thing and look into it. Why i say Thing and not I am, because its from a different place things look different but you can recognize it that it is the i am from earlier, and you also know the path to it.

Also i can shut off realities, they stop affect me.. i can notice then my acting what resulted in bullying animals(example), i then see it and stop doing it..i have a way to remove defilements and stop acting vile.

[markandeya]

All the best for your practice

[auto]

All the best for your practice

thanks, but i describe like that you could understand the scope i refer to. When you start practice you see things are very mundane, more mundane than mundane is, since mundane path is high on substances and love life and what else.

And when you describe the way you describe, i wonder how you would start your path, from what exactly?

[auto]

do you mean mechanics like "I am" is a sound what comes from the center of solar system? and when you have ears to listen it you hear the teachings?