YOU CANNOT POST. OUR WEB HOSTING COMPANY DECIDED TO MOVE THE SERVER TO ANOTHER LOCATION. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU CAN VIEW THIS VERSION WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW POSTING AND WILL NOT SAVE ANYTHING YOU DO ONCE THE OTHER SERVER GOES ONLINE.

"Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism? - Page 3 - Dhamma Wheel

"Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18442
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: "Luminous, monks, is the mind."

Postby Ben » Sun Dec 27, 2009 8:43 pm

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

(Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • •

e: [email protected]..

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: "Luminous, monks, is the mind."

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Dec 28, 2009 3:32 am



He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:37 am


yuuki
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 5:21 am

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby yuuki » Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:02 am


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:19 am

Last edited by Cittasanto on Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.


He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:34 am


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:37 am

hi Yuuki
just something I think worth adding to what you say.
Brahma isn't described as the chief of all the gods in the suttas, I haven't looked into this in any way but I believe that in the order of Divine beings/realms the Brahma realm/beings aren't even the highest.
Sumedho in his Book 'The Four Noble Truths' says that the Noble Truths are Noble, not because they are metaphysical statements but because they are reflective.

nice post BTW


He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

Cafael Dust
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Cafael Dust » Mon Dec 28, 2009 3:53 pm

Tilt:

And see how many paragraphs of contorting text, written by you and in the link you provide, are needed to distance this very clear and unambiguous passage from both Mahayana and Quaker concepts. :juggling:
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Dec 28, 2009 4:35 pm



He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

Cafael Dust
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Cafael Dust » Mon Dec 28, 2009 5:20 pm

Manapa, aside from the debate at hand, I find some of your posts difficult to understand linguistically. I don't mean this as a get out clause in this argument, you seem intelligent and to know what you want to say and you make good points, but sometimes your grammar is difficult to pick apart.
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Cittasanto » Mon Dec 28, 2009 6:14 pm



He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Dec 28, 2009 7:43 pm


User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby tiltbillings » Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:19 pm


User avatar
Jechbi
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am
Contact:

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Jechbi » Tue Dec 29, 2009 7:47 am


User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby tiltbillings » Tue Dec 29, 2009 7:58 am


User avatar
Jechbi
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am
Contact:

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Jechbi » Tue Dec 29, 2009 8:22 am


User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby tiltbillings » Tue Dec 29, 2009 8:30 am


User avatar
Jechbi
Posts: 1268
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:38 am
Contact:

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Jechbi » Tue Dec 29, 2009 8:39 am


User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23012
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby tiltbillings » Tue Dec 29, 2009 9:26 am


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?

Postby Cittasanto » Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:23 pm

Hi All
would anyone say they worship The Lord Buddha as Christians worship Jesus because there are similarities?


He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.


Return to “Connections to Other Paths”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine

cron