there are many hell planets (we've discovered)bryozoa wrote: the Ancients often encoded advanced astronomical knowledge in myth
I see no reason to waste planets
there are many hell planets (we've discovered)bryozoa wrote: the Ancients often encoded advanced astronomical knowledge in myth
Rebirth could take place on those planets? Devas themselves could be celestial bodies, stars or planets or highly evolved life forms indistinguishable from them?cappuccino wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 4:08 pmthere are many hell planets (we've discovered)bryozoa wrote: the Ancients often encoded advanced astronomical knowledge in myth
I see no reason to waste planets
slim are the changes,
It is a question why it sometimes rains and he bluntly says it is gods of the rainy clouds.“Sir, what is the cause, what is the reason why sometimes it rains?”
“Mendicant, there are what are called gods of the rainy clouds.
Sometimes they think:
‘Why don’t we revel in our own kind of enjoyment?’ Then, in accordance with their wish, it becomes rainy. This is the cause, this is the reason why sometimes it rains.”
Gods of the Rainy Clouds.??? Oh gawd! What superstitious nonsense! Much of the suttas mention of devas and gods may be correct, but Gods Of The Rainy Clouds, no I don't think so.
https://suttacentral.net/sn32.57/en/sujato
“Sir, what is the cause, what is the reason why sometimes it rains?”
“Mendicant, there are what are called gods of the rainy clouds.
Sometimes they think:
‘Why don’t we revel in our own kind of enjoyment?’ Then, in accordance with their wish, it becomes rainy. This is the cause, this is the reason why sometimes it rains.”
Not being a Buddhist scholar, I was going to let this go, but honestly such credulity might make the most ardent evangelical blush! How can we be certain what was transcribed centuries after the Buddha lived can genuinely be attributed to him? Does Buddhism have its equivalent of the Q Source?JamesTheGiant wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:23 pmGods of the Rainy Clouds.??? Oh gawd! What superstitious nonsense! Much of the suttas mention of devas and gods may be correct, but Gods Of The Rainy Clouds, no I don't think so.
https://suttacentral.net/sn32.57/en/sujato
“Sir, what is the cause, what is the reason why sometimes it rains?”
“Mendicant, there are what are called gods of the rainy clouds.
Sometimes they think:
‘Why don’t we revel in our own kind of enjoyment?’ Then, in accordance with their wish, it becomes rainy. This is the cause, this is the reason why sometimes it rains.”
Clouds are condensed water vapor. They rain when the moisture content saturates the air, small suspended droplets combine, and it starts to fall out.
I have no doubt that myths and foolish superstitions got into the suttas somehow. The Buddha might not have said them, they may have been added later when the suttas were rewritten or completely invented, as we know some were.
I completely agree that we're living in a spiritual dark age but If I start believing in hungry ghosts and hellish realms then I'd also have to entertain the possibility that a jealous ethno-nationalist God might exist and revealed religion is true.cappuccino wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:07 pm our time is called the Iron Age or Kali Yuga
hence conditions, in general, are at the worst
what this means for religion is lack of faith, or in other words, skepticism
you might think highly of doubt, but that's confusion
That is right; so just get to work on it instead of indulging in speculative views.
The texts from the first time they were written down have been lost. But there are the Chinese Agamas which were suttas taken to China early on, and they match with the modern Pali Canon Suttas in many cases.
...there are several sectarian versions of the satipatthana Sutta. These share much in common, yet differ in key points...
Thank you, I'll look at that thread with interest. As it is indisputable that Buddhist teaching always included supernormal phenomena, I will concentrate on what matters as per the advice of Bhikkhu Pesala.JamesTheGiant wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:47 pmThe texts from the first time they were written down have been lost. But there are the Chinese Agamas which were suttas taken to China early on, and they match with the modern Pali Canon Suttas in many cases.
If you are interested you can read through this rather large topic where the authenticity of one of our most important suttas is debated
viewtopic.php?f=29&t=2266
...there are several sectarian versions of the satipatthana Sutta. These share much in common, yet differ in key points...
In ancient times, powerful people, such as kings, rulers, parents, the wealthy or mystics were considered "gods". No need to look into astronomy.bryozoa wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:52 pm If there is one thing I have learnt about the Ancients is that they often encoded advanced astronomical knowledge in mythology. A lot of Buddhist scripture concerning planes of existence, ghosts and devas may relate to investigations into consciousness which would have been perfectly understood by Buddha's followers at the time. Only now through the eyes of modernity do we take these accounts as literal.
I think it's the opposite of that. Only now through the eyes of modernity, AKA materialism, do we take these accounts as just metaphorical. Without actual rebirth, the notion of kamma doesn't make sense and one could argue that the whole point of getting enlightenment, becomes pointless. Besides, there is just way too much evidence in the old scriptures to argue that it's just a problem or occurrence of modern interpretation. Literal rebirth is an ancient interpenetration that is embraced by every Buddhist tradition everywhere, for thousands of years.bryozoa wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:52 pm Oh no not a liar, merely that modern humans misinterpret. If there is one thing I have learnt about the Ancients is that they often encoded advanced astronomical knowledge in mythology. A lot of Buddhist scripture concerning planes of existence, ghosts and devas may relate to investigations into consciousness which would have been perfectly understood by Buddha's followers at the time. Only now through the eyes of modernity do we take these accounts as literal.
This strikes me as confused. "Karmic debt" (which itself could be described as a 'superstition'), is nonsensical unless within the context of literal rebirth, i.e. through hell/heaven/animal realms (the ending of which is "liberation"). If there is no literal rebirth, then there is no kamma, and therefore (as pointed out in this thread) there is just annihilation - one life and done. No need for buddhism if dukkha ceases when the body stops functioning.bryozoa wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:23 pm While I respect and am exhilarated by Buddhism (particularly Theravada), I am also alienated by the fact that supernatural beings feature so prominently in Buddhist scripture. Surely the sole focus should be on liberation from incurring karmic debt, eschewing every form of superstition as extraneous to that overriding purpose?