@lal I understand, I won’t press the issue further, but I will clarify I am not happy with it. Simply trying to clarify. Thank you again for your time.
@y not said
“When a student does not understand what the teacher is saying, when the ‘import’ does not sink in, no matter how many times he may recall the teacher’s words afterwards, even if he took notes while the teacher was explaining, he will not understand.”
The claim here seems to be that if one doesn’t understand the teaching initially he will not understand. Please correct me if I’m wrong in that characterization.
My point is that it can take time for that to happen. One can hear the dhamma, not understand it, and overtime and reflection in comparison to one’s own observations and experience insight and truly understand it. As long as one has access to the true dhamma whether it be through memory recording, or writings on palm leaves or websites, the framework is there to walk the path. If this wasn’t the case, there would be no point in recording the buddha’s words and the commentaries. The buddha himself taught that each individual must walk the path for themself and confirm it’s efficacy, it is not accurate to say one understands immediately upon hearing the lesson. Contemplation and reflection on the concepts lead to insight. Please correct me if none of that is supported by the suttas.
My point was simply that if the Buddha as an ascetic had access to the path as expounded by the Buddha Kassapa, then it would have been inevitable that even if he was unable to understand it initially upon looking at his past lives or in any of his past lives. He could use the path as outlined by the Buddha Kassapa to gain awakening, gaining that understanding as he walked it. In very same way that an arahant does upon learning directly from the words or teachings of an Ariya.
The only other conclusion I can imagine is that the dhamma he discovered was markedly different than what the Buddha Kassapa taught. As the fact that he was able to gain awakening proves he was capable of understanding these concepts. And as a Buddha is the highest disseminator of the Dhamma, then it would follow Buddha Kassapa would not have taught misleading or wrong dhamma.
I don’t see what is faulty here. Perhaps I’m being dense, I don’t know, it’s why I reached out. I promise I am not arguing for the sake of arguing here. Or trying to debate opinions. I am comparing it with what is expected of consistency with the rest of the dhamma.
Most of these problems are eliminated if the buddha was never ordained or were confirmed by past buddhas.
Thank you for your time y not and your help.
may you progress on the path as well