Buddhism and Hinduism on Atman.

[Sam Vara]

So he was able to feel pain but had no anxiety about that possibility of pain? Just think about that oxymoron for a second...

Again, moot point, as there is no oxymoron there.

You obviously can't see the clear point.

Yes, I can see the clear point. The same point has been discussed here on DW several times over the past decade.

A person can feel pain but has no anxiety or desire to avoid it??
That makes zero sense.

For whom does it make no sense?

[may.all.bliss]

The Dalai Lama laughs all the time

[cappuccino]

The Dalai Lama laughs all the time

Diplomacy


the art of dealing with people in a sensitive and effective way.

[Zenny]

Images are a poor guide to what the Buddha actually taught:
http://benjaminradford.com/playing-gods ... otate-php/
https://www.pngwing.com/en/free-png-bmaed



They are, as far as I know, quiet on whether all or any Buddhas, including Gautama, have achieved zero laughter.

Art and statues are a guide to what is traditional and accepted in some cases.

You are of course free to believe whatever traditions you like, but unfortunately that's not the case within Theravada Buddhism.

If they are quiet then then we can say none of them did.

I'm not sure what you mean here. If the statues are quiet? They usually are...

If you mean that the suttas are quiet on whether Buddhas "achieved zero laughter", therefore it follows that none of them did...then that's a really basic error of logic, I'm afraid. The most we can say is that there is no sutta-based evidence that they did. But note Robert's point regarding the Abhidhamma.

So there is only that snippet that disapproves of laughter. And you know the Full context and application of that sutra?

That "snippet" is virtually the whole sutta. And none of us know the "Full context and application" of any sutta, but I know enough about it to be reasonably confident, thanks.

All conjecture and vague reasoning.

[Zenny]

Again, moot point, as there is no oxymoron there.

You obviously can't see the clear point.

Yes, I can see the clear point. The same point has been discussed here on DW several times over the past decade.

A person can feel pain but has no anxiety or desire to avoid it??
That makes zero sense.

For whom does it make no sense?

For any human who can reason and has experience of life.
It's like saying a human can physically fly by flapping his arms,then feigning surprise when someone objects.
It's been discussed for a decade? That's terrible.

[Zenny]

The Dalai Lama laughs all the time

Diplomacy


the art of dealing with people in a sensitive and effective way.

That's called being disingenuous.
So now all things are justified as "diplomacy".
Why didn't Buddha use this technique according to the sutras?

[cappuccino]

So now all things are justified as "diplomacy"

this religion is about peace of mind


this forum should lead in that direction

[robertk]

Buddhas and arahats do not laugh - but there are occasional conditions for hasituppadacitta ( smiling consciousness). See Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma , I 10.

And yet I have seen the dailai lama and other monks laugh publicly.

And they are not Buddhas or arahats.

[Zenny]

So now all things are justified as "diplomacy"

this religion is about peace of mind


this forum should lead in that direction

Peace of mind by the use of dishonest diplomacy?

[Zenny]

Buddhas and arahats do not laugh - but there are occasional conditions for hasituppadacitta ( smiling consciousness). See Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma , I 10.

And yet I have seen the dailai lama and other monks laugh publicly.

And they are not Buddhas or arahats.

Other sects may differ. I wasn't aware your sect was the only one with the truth.
So these great teachers never laugh or express tremendous happiness,only "smiling conviousness"? Tell me,is this smiling conciousness with the mouth or just an internal thought?

[Sam Vara]

Art and statues are a guide to what is traditional and accepted in some cases.

You are of course free to believe whatever traditions you like, but unfortunately that's not the case within Theravada Buddhism.

If they are quiet then then we can say none of them did.

I'm not sure what you mean here. If the statues are quiet? They usually are...

If you mean that the suttas are quiet on whether Buddhas "achieved zero laughter", therefore it follows that none of them did...then that's a really basic error of logic, I'm afraid. The most we can say is that there is no sutta-based evidence that they did. But note Robert's point regarding the Abhidhamma.

So there is only that snippet that disapproves of laughter. And you know the Full context and application of that sutra?

That "snippet" is virtually the whole sutta. And none of us know the "Full context and application" of any sutta, but I know enough about it to be reasonably confident, thanks.

All conjecture and vague reasoning.

No, there's nothing conjectural about my pointing out your error of logic. I'm happy to show you where it's wrong.

[Zenny]

You are of course free to believe whatever traditions you like, but unfortunately that's not the case within Theravada Buddhism.



I'm not sure what you mean here. If the statues are quiet? They usually are...

If you mean that the suttas are quiet on whether Buddhas "achieved zero laughter", therefore it follows that none of them did...then that's a really basic error of logic, I'm afraid. The most we can say is that there is no sutta-based evidence that they did. But note Robert's point regarding the Abhidhamma.



That "snippet" is virtually the whole sutta. And none of us know the "Full context and application" of any sutta, but I know enough about it to be reasonably confident, thanks.

All conjecture and vague reasoning.

No, there's nothing conjectural about my pointing out your error of logic. I'm happy to show you where it's wrong.

You don't seem to understand that you are not the authority on logic.

[Sam Vara]

You obviously can't see the clear point.

Yes, I can see the clear point. The same point has been discussed here on DW several times over the past decade.

A person can feel pain but has no anxiety or desire to avoid it??
That makes zero sense.

For whom does it make no sense?

For any human who can reason and has experience of life.

Show us the reasoning. A simply syllogism should suffice. Otherwise people might be forgiven for thinking that it's just you that can't make sense of it.

It's like saying a human can physically fly by flapping his arms,then feigning surprise when someone objects.

No, it's not like that at all. One claim is about physics, the other is about the difference between concepts. And nobody is surprised; as I said, I've seen the same issue rehearsed numerous times on DW and elsewhere.

It's been discussed for a decade? That's terrible.

Not really - we get new members all the time, and there are lots of similar issues that come round again and again.

[Sam Vara]

All conjecture and vague reasoning.

No, there's nothing conjectural about my pointing out your error of logic. I'm happy to show you where it's wrong.

You don't seem to understand that you are not the authority on logic.

As far as that particular very basic attempt is concerned, I am.

[Zenny]

Yes, I can see the clear point. The same point has been discussed here on DW several times over the past decade.



For whom does it make no sense?

For any human who can reason and has experience of life.

Show us the reasoning. A simply syllogism should suffice. Otherwise people might be forgiven for thinking that it's just you that can't make sense of it.

It's like saying a human can physically fly by flapping his arms,then feigning surprise when someone objects.

No, it's not like that at all. One claim is about physics, the other is about the difference between concepts. And nobody is surprised; as I said, I've seen the same issue rehearsed numerous times on DW and elsewhere.

It's been discussed for a decade? That's terrible.

Not really - we get new members all the time, and there are lots of similar issues that come round again and again.

A syllogism? I'm not a fan or follower of aristotle.
I've already made my point in clear English.
What's terrible is the lack of common clear sense.