To Elohim, tell me about cherry picking in the Pali Canon

[Mojo]

Yrreg, what is your opinion on all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers? Do you ever eat of their flesh?

 

[nosho]

There are broadly two kinds of sources for Buddhism, written and oral.

And direct experience.

Can anyone among the Buddhists in this forum suggest some parts of the three baskets called the Tipitaka whatever, which are the most accessible in English to themselves, and which I can approach to do my own kind of cherry-picking for what is life and what it is all about, in this component portion of the Pali Canon?

The mangala sutta is pretty accessible.

 

[Mojo]

And direct experience.

OK, there are broadly three kinds of sources for Buddhism: written, oral, and direct experience.

And nice red uniforms.

 

[yrreg]

First, I read about the writing, before I will read it.

Am I reading right? Are my eyes deceiving me? Yrreg wants to read the Pali Canon?

It only took you, what, nearly two years before you wanted to actually read the books you're criticizing? Unbelievable.

Well, I have no idea where you can find them. Also note that we're talking about a huge set of books, I doubt very many people have been able to read them all. I suggest starting with the Dhammapada, which can be said to be a sort of 'Best of Buddha'. I'm sure a websearch will find an online edition very quick. I have no idea which version to point you towards, as I'm not familiar with English translations of the Dhammapada - I read mine in Norwegian, loaned at the local library and translated by Kåre Lie, one of Europe's foremost experts on the Pali language.

I wish you good luck in reading the Dhammapada - it's not too long a book - and look forward to discussing it with you when you're done with it.

Bravo, Yrreg!

Ryokan, you told me you are a member of the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order. I understand that this group is similar analogically to the Mormons who aside from their devotion to Jesus Christ also take for their authority one Joseph Smith, so that their devotion to Jesus Christ is filtered through the mind and heart of Joseph Smith. Correct me if I am wrong, because I am writing from stock knowledge.

Now, your Joseph Smith is one British person by the name of or changed name of -- wait I will look it up in my instant free dictionary and encyclopedia...

Here, he is called or calls himself Sangharakshita.: "Sangharakshita was born Dennis Lingwood in Tooting London, in 1925."

--------------


Tell me Ryokan -- before I read a piece of writing I try to read first about it from people who have studied it or examined it -- tell me in what language is the Pali Canon recorded in writing?

Don't go away, stay with this thread and give me your sober and apropos voice to and on my critical observations on Buddhism.



Yrreg

 

[Complexity]

Yrreg - Answer our questions and then go away and read for a few years.

Start with the Dhammapada. Use the internet and other resources rather than asking us silly questions.

Oh, by the way, you are wrong.

 

[nosho]

Start with the Dhammapada.

Or the mangala sutta. It's a quick read.

First, I read about the writing, before I will read it.

Why not wait until after? That might give you more of a chance to arrive at a fresh point of view.

 

[Ryokan]

Ryokan, you told me you are a member of the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order.

Yes. But I'm purely a passive member, as I've told you, and have no dealings whatsoever with this group. I agree with their approach to Buddhism, but have no care as to who's the leader and what his personal activities are.

I understand that this group is similar analogically to the Mormons who aside from their devotion to Jesus Christ also take for their authority one Joseph Smith, so that their devotion to Jesus Christ is filtered through the mind and heart of Joseph Smith. Correct me if I am wrong, because I am writing from stock knowledge.

Err...

How is the FWBO similar to the Mormons? Care to explain? I just don't see it.

Now, your Joseph Smith is one British person by the name of or changed name of -- wait I will look it up in my instant free dictionary and encyclopedia...

Here, he is called or calls himself Sangharakshita.: "Sangharakshita was born Dennis Lingwood in Tooting London, in 1925."

Okay. And how is he similar to Joseph Smith? Care to explain? I just don't see it.

Tell me Ryokan -- before I read a piece of writing I try to read first about it from people who have studied it or examined it -- tell me in what language is the Pali Canon recorded in writing?

Are you asking me what language the Pali Canon is originally written in? If so, the answer is easy and obvious; it's written in Pali. Hence the name.

As for reading any of it, why not just do it? It might give you a better understanding of Buddhism, and to be quite frank, you need it.

Don't go away, stay with this thread and give me your sober and apropos voice to and on my critical observations on Buddhism.

We'll see.

 

[Nosaj]

yrreg,

First, I have to look for a critical and readable English version of some complete part of the Pali Canon.

If you would like me to suggest some complete collections of suttas in English, I would suggest The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Majjhima Nikaya by Bhikkhu Nanamoli, The Long Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Digha Nikaya by Maurice Walshe, and The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A Translation of the Samyutta Nikaya by Bikkhu Bodhi.

First, I read about the writing, before I will read it.

If, however, this is the case, I would suggest reading Thanissaro Bhikkhu's anthology from the Pali Canon entitled Wings to Awakening. It is a comprehensive collection of sutta passages from the Pali Canon, organized around the set of teachings that the Buddha himself said formed the heart of his message, with each section being introduced, when necessary, with an essay written by the author.

Jason

 

[yrreg]

The Pali language does not have its corresponding wriiten script.

That was what I thought also that the Pali Canon was written in the Pali language writing script.

But from reading about Pali Canon and Pali language, it appears that the Pali Canon was put down in Singhalese script in first century CE, because the Pali language does not have its own writing script.

Correct me if I am wrong.


So, for all the centuries some six hundred years Buddhism of the Theravada school was being kept alive by oral tradition, then it was to all appearances redacted into written form not in Pali language own script but in the script of Singhalese.

This is like Islam being kept alive by oral tradition until the eleventh century CE when Islam was redacted into writing, but with the Latin script, which is also the script used in written English from since many centuries back, to the present contemporary written English.


Correct me if I am wrong.



Find out, Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts here, what peoples spoke Pali and when, from since it first appeared in history's horizons as a language or a speech, in everyday communication and for religious purposes, up to the present.



Yrreg

 

[Complexity]

Yrreg - You are wrong.

Answer the questions that we have put to you.

Then, go away and read and critique the Pali Canon before you continue to babble about it here.

You are still wrong.

 

[nosho]

That was what I thought also that the Pali Canon was written in the Pali language writing script.

But from reading about Pali Canon and Pali language, it appears that the Pali Canon was put down in Singhalese script in first century CE, because the Pali language does not have its own writing script.

Correct me if I am wrong.


So, for all the centuries some six hundred years Buddhism of the Theravada school was being kept alive by oral tradition, then it was to all appearances redacted into written form not in Pali language own script but in the script of Singhalese.

This is like Islam being kept alive by oral tradition until the eleventh century CE when Islam was redacted into writing, but with the Latin script, which is also the script used in written English from since many centuries back, to the present contemporary written English.


Correct me if I am wrong.



Find out, Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts here, what peoples spoke Pali and when, from since it first appeared in history's horizons as a language or a speech, in everyday communication and for religious purposes, up to the present.



Yrreg

Yrreg, all of this is so irrelevant. The Buddha didn't even speak "Pali." My understanding is that he spoke Magadhi. And the first written recordings of his teachings were made on palm leaves in far-off Sri Lanka. By a monk who was arrogant and reluctant to do the work.

What point are you trying to make?

I thought you said this thread was supposed to be about cherry-picking in the Pali canon. You said that you wanted suggestions for parts of the canon to read so that you could (your words) "do my own kind of cherry-picking for what is life and what it is all about."

I suggested the mangala sutta (2 links posted above), because based on your comments and observations here, I think it's part of the Pali canon that you might enjoy cherry-picking. It would take you less than five minutes to read this sutta. I'm interested in your thoughts about it.

 

[nosho]

A snippet from the mangala sutta:

"To support one's father and mother; to cherish one's wife and children, and to be engaged in peaceful occupations -- this is the highest blessing."

 

[Nosaj]

yrreg,

That was what I thought also that the Pali Canon was written in the Pali language writing script.

While Pali is the name that is given to the language in Theravada texts, the commentarial tradition states that the language of the Pali Canon is Magadhi. This idea, however, has been disputed by scholars, and I am of the mind to be skeptical of either assertion.

From what I understand, the term "Pali" originally referred to a canonical text rather than any specific language, and the use of "Pali" as the name of the language used in the Pali Canon was due to a misunderstanding which occurred several centuries ago.

Some scholars even speculate that the language of the Pali Canon is a version of an Middle Indo-Aryan dialect closely related to Prakrit, and not Magadhi. There is evidence to support both ideas, however, and I think more research needs to be done in this field.

Jason

 

[yrreg]

My game here is to do critique of Buddhism on critical thinking and evidence.

Yrreg, all of this is so irrelevant. The Buddha didn't even speak "Pali." My understanding is that he spoke Magadhi. And the first written recordings of his teachings were made on palm leaves in far-off Sri Lanka. By a monk who was arrogant and reluctant to do the work.

What point are you trying to make?


[...]

.​

What point are you trying to make?​

I like to bring Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts to adopt a critical approach to Buddhism.

You see, Buddhism is just one of the optional worldviews entertained by peoples, who have even determined to live by their peculiarly chosen one particular worldview from other worldviews, e.g., Buddhism.

A worldview is like a cuisine, a couture, or a coiffure; animals just strive to stay alive and reproduce, it is owing to the intelligence and complex emotionality of humans that they also seek to live according to a worldview; the more intelligent behavior is to also do critical analysis of their respectively embraced worldview, on the basis of critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence.

This thread on cherry-picking in the Pali Canon is one way I can invite Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts to do critical thinking and search for empirical evidence in Buddhism.

I am the resident Buddhist critic here and I also study hate speech of people who do not want me to do critique of Buddhism here, that is why before I just called myself Resident Buddhist Critic, afterwards when many here hate me for my critique of Buddhism, I started calling myself Resident Buddhist Critic Studying [Their] Hate Speech.


I am glad to meet Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts who are on the one hand attached to their kind of customized and screened Buddhism and Buddhism generally, while on the other hand, they are not hateful of criticism of Buddhism and people doing critique of Buddhism for a fun hobby as a mental exercise in critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence.

And I just disregard those who hate me for my fun hobby here -- aside from keeping tabs of their hatred toward me as materials for the examination of psychological inadequacy, insecurity, and deficiency.


To nosho and Elohim, allow me to commend you sincerely for your concern with critical thinking in Buddhist matters.

Please bear with my apparently irreverent or even disparaging approach in my critique of Buddhism; as beauty it is said by thoughtful people is in the eye of the beholder, so also irreverence and disparagement of a worldview could be an instinctive accusation from the part of a worldview enthusiasts against its critic.


Yrreg

 

[Complexity]

Despicable.

 

[calebprime]

[
Kind of circular, what you think?


Yrreg

not all circles are vicious.

some are useful.

some are tedious.

 

[nosho]

Please bear with my apparently irreverent or even disparaging approach in my critique of Buddhism ...

I used the word "irrelevant," not "irreverent." Please feel free to be as irreverent as you wish.

I would still be interested in your thoughts about the mangala sutta, yyreg. Or, for that matter, about any other portions of the Pali canon that have been suggested here for discussion.

 

[nosho]

I like to bring Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts to adopt a critical approach to Buddhism.

You may wish to read this article, titled The Right to Ask Questions.

 

[Dancing David]

.​

What point are you trying to make?​

I like to bring Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts to adopt a critical approach to Buddhism.

Funny that, since you show a lack of ability in the area of critical thinking. Whenever someone does mention what the feel to be in error in the practice of buddhism, you ignore it.

Your own writing and thoughts show an appaling lack of critical skills.
[/quote]

You see, Buddhism is just one of the optional worldviews entertained by peoples, who have even determined to live by their peculiarly chosen one particular worldview from other worldviews, e.g., Buddhism.

A worldview is like a cuisine, a couture, or a coiffure; animals just strive to stay alive and reproduce, it is owing to the intelligence and complex emotionality of humans that they also seek to live according to a worldview; the more intelligent behavior is to also do critical analysis of their respectively embraced worldview, on the basis of critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence.
[/quote]
Funny how you have neither most of the time.

This thread on cherry-picking in the Pali Canon is one way I can invite Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts to do critical thinking and search for empirical evidence in Buddhism.

I am the resident Buddhist critic here and I also study hate speech of people who do not want me to do critique of Buddhism here, that is why before I just called myself Resident Buddhist Critic, afterwards when many here hate me for my critique of Buddhism, I started calling myself Resident Buddhist Critic Studying [Their] Hate Speech.

Uh huh, and people have not told you to kill yourself have they, which was your advice to buddhists. Much less you lack of any common courtesy in many areas.

I am glad to meet Buddhists and Buddhism enthusiasts who are on the one hand attached to their kind of customized and screened Buddhism and Buddhism generally, while on the other hand, they are not hateful of criticism of Buddhism and people doing critique of Buddhism for a fun hobby as a mental exercise in critical thinking and the search for empirical evidence.

Funny that, when offered the material to critique you gad off on another thread. You are a poseur and a cahrlatan without a concern for critical thought or evidence.

Made up anything recently?

And I just disregard those who hate me for my fun hobby here -- aside from keeping tabs of their hatred toward me as materials for the examination of psychological inadequacy, insecurity, and deficiency.


To nosho and Elohim, allow me to commend you sincerely for your concern with critical thinking in Buddhist matters.

Please bear with my apparently irreverent or even disparaging approach in my critique of Buddhism; as beauty it is said by thoughtful people is in the eye of the beholder, so also irreverence and disparagement of a worldview could be an instinctive accusation from the part of a worldview enthusiasts against its critic.


Yrreg

370 words, mostly about Yrreg's ego and not the Pali canon.

Funny Yrreg, what is your excuse for not doing your alleged sceptical critique of the eightfold path?

 

[Dancing David]

http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/anatta.txt

If you read the source, you will see that the author has some belief in Mind and it as some sort of self. I disagree with that.

'The body, monks, is not self. If the body were the self, this body
would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible (to say) with
regard to the body, "Let my body be thus. Let my body not be thus."
But precisely because the body is not self, the body lends itself to
dis-ease. And it is not possible (to say) with regard to the body,
"Let my body be thus. Let my body not be thus."

'Feeling, monks, is not self. If the feeling were the self, these feeling
would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible (to say) with
regard to the feeling, "Let my feeling be thus. Let my feeling not be thus."
But precisely because the feeling is not self, the feeling lends itself to
dis-ease. And it is not possible (to say) with regard to the feeling,
"Let my feeling be thus. Let my feeling not be thus."

Perception is not self.... Mental processes
are not self....

'Consciousness is not self. If consciousness were the self, this
consciousness would not lend itself to dis-ease. It would be possible
(to say) with regard to consciousness, "Let my consciousness be thus.
Let my consciousness not be thus." But precisely because
consciousness is not self, consciousness lends itself to dis-ease.
And it is not possible (to say) with regard to consciousness, "Let my
consciousness be thus. Let my consciousness not be thus."

'How do you construe thus, monks--Is the body constant or inconstant?'
'Inconstant, Lord.' 'And is that which is inconstant easeful or
stressful?' 'Stressful, Lord.' 'And is it fitting to regard what is
inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: "This is mine. This is
my self. This is what I am"?' 'No, Lord.'

'...Is feeling constant or inconstant?.... Is perception constant or
inconstant?.... Are mental processes constant or inconstant?....

'Is consciousness constant or inconstant?' 'Inconstant, Lord.' 'And
is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?' 'Stressful, Lord.'
'And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to
change as: "This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am"?'
'No, Lord.'

'Thus, monks, any body whatsoever--past, future, or present; internal
or external; blatant or subtle, common or sublime, far or near: every
body--is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as:
"This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am."

'Any feeling whatsoever.... Any perception whatsoever.... Any mental
processes whatsoever....

'Any consciousness whatsoever--past, future, or present; internal or
external; blatant or subtle, common or sublime, far or near: every
consciousness--is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment
as: "This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am."

'Seeing thus, the instructed Noble disciple grows disenchanted with
the body, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception,
disenchanted with mental processes, and disenchanted with
consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through
dispassion, he is released. With release, there is the knowledge,
"Released." He discerns that, "Birth is depleted, the holy life
fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world."'

That is what the Blessed One said. Glad at heart, the group of five
monks delighted at his words. And while this explanation was being
given, the hearts of the group of five monks, through no clinging (not
being sustained), were released from the mental effluents.

So Yrreg, what is your critique of this sutta?