The Pitfalls of Western analysis of "Dharmic Traditions"

[pueraeternus]

Are we? What if they are better suited to working in a diner? What if working in a diner provides valuable work experience for someone aspiring to be a great chef? Anyway, why are diner chefs not to be considered great chefs?

This has nothing to do with the topic about comparing the fruits of a Buddha and the fruits of an Arhat. You are talking about what may be best for people of various dispositions. Fine if you want to start another thread and talk about it. This thread is off topic enough already.

[dharmagoat]

This has nothing to do with the topic about comparing the fruits of a Buddha and the fruits of an Arhat. You are talking about what may be best for people of various dispositions. Fine if you want to start another thread and talk about it. This thread is off topic enough already.

I'm done.

[pueraeternus]

This has nothing to do with the topic about comparing the fruits of a Buddha and the fruits of an Arhat. You are talking about what may be best for people of various dispositions. Fine if you want to start another thread and talk about it. This thread is off topic enough already.

I'm done.

I may follow along if deepbluehum remains unreceptive.

[deepbluehum]

You talk just like Tilt and block off all other information. There is nothing more I can say to you if you refuse to even come up with a proper counter.

What you don't get is that you haven't come up with a proper counter. I mentioned Maha-moggallana who had the faculties Buddha had.

And I countered that Shariputra had those powers too - so your counter is moot.

No, they were not as well developed. Maha-moggallana's psychic powers were unmatched among the disciples.

[deepbluehum]

Obviously? What is obvious is that you do not know enough about the suttas, pick and choose those you like and come up with your pet theory (granted, you seem to have just followed whatever Tilt said and it is really his theory). Even when presented with sutric citations you don't come up with a proper counter.

This is a stupid response.

[deepbluehum]

I may follow along if deepbluehum remains unreceptive.

Aside from your factual interpretations, show me in the suttas where Buddha himself teaches how his realization is superior to the Arahats.

[pueraeternus]

What you don't get is that you haven't come up with a proper counter. I mentioned Maha-moggallana who had the faculties Buddha had.

And I countered that Shariputra had those powers too - so your counter is moot.

No, they were not as well developed. Maha-moggallana's psychic powers were unmatched among the disciples.

First of all, Maudgalyayana's psychic powers certainly does not match the Buddha's. And you are missing the point of the Sampasadaniya Sutta - it is not about abhijnas. It's about bodhi and Shariputra clearly states that only previous and future Buddhas are a match of Shakyamuni in terms of bodhi.

[pueraeternus]

I may follow along if deepbluehum remains unreceptive.

Aside from your factual interpretations, show me in the suttas where Buddha himself teaches how his realization is superior to the Arahats.

I don't have the exact sutta, but look at Helmuth's article about Maudgalyayana:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... html#notes

About the differing range of wisdom, the Buddha once said that there are questions which only he could conceive and answer, but not Sariputta; there are other questions which only Sariputta could clarify, but not Moggallana' and there are those which only Moggallana could solve, but not the other disciples (J. 483). Thus the two chief disciples were like a bridge between the supreme qualities of the Buddha and the capacities of the other disciples.

Hence Maudgalyayana's realization is even lesser than Shariputra's, and Shariputra's realization is lesser than the Buddha's.

[pueraeternus]

I may follow along if deepbluehum remains unreceptive.

Aside from your factual interpretations, show me in the suttas where Buddha himself teaches how his realization is superior to the Arahats.

The Mahasakuludayi Sutta:

http://tipitaka.wikia.com/wiki/Mahasakuludayi_Sutta

Udayi, there are five other things, on account of which, my disciples honour and revere me and abide supported receiving the due honour for it. What are the five? Udayi, my disciples honour me for the highest mass of virtues. The recluse Gotama is virtuous, endowed with the highest mass of virtues. This is the first thing on account of which my disciples honour and revere me.

Again Udayi, my disciples honour me for the highest mass of knowledge and vision; The recluse Gotama, knowing, says I know, seeing says, I see. Knowing the recluse Gotama teaches, with examples and saying wonderful things. This is the second thing on account of which my disciples honour and revere me..

Again Udayi, my disciples honour me for the highest mass of wisdom. The recluse Gotama, is endowed with very high wisdom. There is no possibility that he has not recognized a single sign, on account of which a future false teacher would arouse a dispute, and he has rightfully settled all disputes that arise at present. Udayi, have you seen a disciple of mine interrupting me in the middle of a talk?

‘No, venerable sir, I have not.’

My disciples think, indeed, it is on account me, that the disciples are advised, thus they honour me with the highest mass of wisdom. This is the third thing on account of which my disciples honour and revere me and abide supported receiving the due honour for it. .

...

Again, Udayi, when my disciples are afflicted and overcome with unpleasantness, they approach me and ask about the noble truth of unpleasantness. Then I explain it to them. I convince their minds explaining the noble truth of unpleasantness. They ask about the noble truth of the arising of unpleasantness, the noble truth of the cessation of unpleasantness, and the noble truth of the path to the cessation of unpleasantness. I explain to them the path to the cessation of unpleasantness and explaining it convince their minds on it This is the fourth thing on account of which my disciples honour and revere me and abide supported receiving the due honour for it. .

...

I have declared this method to my disciples, fallen to which method my disciples could destroy desires, release the mind from desires, and the mind released through wisdom, realising it here and now, abide Thus too my disciples abide aiming perfect knowledge for emancipation .
Udayi, this is the fifth thing on account of which my disciples honour and revere me and abide supported receiving the due honour for it.’

[Malcolm]

All you do is argue online.

No, it is not all I do. What I do is translate texts and see patients. I sporadically engage in conversations here which are usually trolled.

[Malcolm]

This has nothing to do with the topic about comparing the fruits of a Buddha and the fruits of an Arhat. You are talking about what may be best for people of various dispositions. Fine if you want to start another thread and talk about it. This thread is off topic enough already.

I'm done.

I may follow along if deepbluehum remains unreceptive.

DBH is going through a phase, it seems.

[Malcolm]

I may follow along if deepbluehum remains unreceptive.

Aside from your factual interpretations, show me in the suttas where Buddha himself teaches how his realization is superior to the Arahats.

Apprently you beleive the Buddha's teachings are confined to the Nikayas/Agamas. That is ok, but such sentiments are out of place in a Mahāyāna forum.

This is religion, here, not science. If you want science, you are in the wrong place and wrong faith.

[pueraeternus]

DBH is going through a phase, it seems.

Indeed. I thought he practiced Dzogchen? It is strange to see him seemingly overturn all his Mahayana convictions. And to boot, not even accepting certain shravakayana tenets.

[JKhedrup]

Also funny if he has read so much of the Pali literature that he advocated getting rid of the monastic sangha in another thread.

[Andrew108]

DBH wants something to happen.

[JKhedrup]

I guess something has happened. This discussion has died. But we did get a few pages of interesting debate before the topic was lost! So for that I am happy.

[muni]

One of the biggest pitfalls is becoming jaded by the profoundness of Dharma without the meaning is penetrating/emerging/transforming... (fill in what you like) our being. Another is becoming complacent.
Some people use butter to make leather flexible and soft. Even the butter is always in contact with the leather, but cannot penetrate the leather, the leather will remain hard and fragyl and becomes harder.

"Dharma must permeate our awareness. All sentient beings posses Buddha nature, consider them with great kindheartedness.".

Oops, who said that now? Forgot right now.

[hamsterdance]

Just for the sake of anyone reading this thread I thought it might be interesting to read critiques of Malhotra's Being Different by other Hindus.

At least some religious Hindus accuse him of engaging in sloppy research, factual errors and logical fallacies.


A few links

1. http://www.sookta-sumana.blogspot.com/2 ... otras.html

Rajiv Malhotra’s argument that Hinduism is Dharma and not a religion is untenable. Hinduism is a religion with its own epistemology, soteriology, and philosophy. Dharma is the code of life as elaborated by scriptures. (dharati lokaaniti dharmah.) Also "Dhiyateevaajanyriti dharmah. Dharmo dharayati prajaah." In the context of religious life of Hindus, it refers to code of life in accordance with the scriptures, but not independent of religion. The term Hindu religion was always used by many Hindu leaders from Tilak and Aurobindo to Radhakrishnan and Gandhi...

2. http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.com/2012 ... erent.html

3. http://www.sookta-sumana.blogspot.com/2 ... es-de.html

4. http://www.sookta-sumana.blogspot.com/2 ... otras.html

5. http://www.sookta-sumana.blogspot.com/2 ... hotra.html