Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I wrote above “The eye, for example, comes in contact with photons.”
But you, Lal, said: “No. The photons (light) just help in capturing an image of the tree by the eyes. Then the eyes pass that captured image to the brain. The brain processes that information and passes it along to the cakku pasada in the mental body.”
What is wrong in my sentence? The physical eye receives photons from the tree, or not?
Also photons are made of the great elements, thus they are not vanna rupa but a mixture of apo, tejo, vayo, patavi, correct?
Thank you Lal. Can I conclude that the tree is made of vanna rupa because a tree is something visible? As I understand external rupa make contact with the internal rupa. The eye for example comes in contact with photons. But the tree is not made of photons. What is what here?
I can tell some views of catholic people regarding questions raised in the post.
Babys/kids who die early are going to heaven because they are so pure in the mind. Also all other people who had no chance to hear about the christian religion are “excused” in similar way, even e.g. indians of the Amazonas river.
Animals are indeed a problem. They are thought to be inferior and not really worth to be considered. Actually catholics become silent when asked in such a way and do not have an answer.
The big differences among the people are also not seen. Again no (good) answer from a catholic.
——–
There is another new age theory which says that each being has chosen its “type of life”, say as a disabled person or a child that gets raped someday. We all come from God and we are actually God. God is thought to be so pure that he cannot perceive himself. In order to perceive himself he created the earth and sends parts of himself to earth to experience life. All our deeds have no consequences, even this life is an illusion, the world is an illusion. …This view is in my eyes totally twisted and sick. But with such a view you can “explain” some things and relax, because it does not matter how you behave…1 user thanked author for this post.
Do I understand it right, the Bodhisatta reached only close to each Jhana and stayed in the vicinity of that Jhana. There is no word that he entered the Jhana.
What is the meaning of the word Bodhisatta (bhodi+satta?)?
I wonder what is fear in relation to kilesa? Is fear a kilesa or upakilesa? Is it part of dosa or moha? Is it part of panca nivarana (e.g. thina middha or uddacca-kukkucca)?
Plants are alive but not sentient. They do not have a mind. There are people who lovingly or evilly speak to cooked rice. The rice reacts with a certain consistency or just rottenness. How can this be explained in terms of Buddha Dhamma?
Under #9 it is said: “…However, the first cells that appeared in the Earth were created by kammic energy (in javana cittas)…”
Also somewhere on this website Lal said that the evolution theory of Darwin is not correct (evolution through natural selection).
I do not understand how the first dinosaur or the first elephant or the first human appeared on earth. Can someone please explain?
Hi Upekkha,
maybe you can ask the “voice” what it wants, or you request the “voice” to leave. You could prepare this by taking a good meditation position, calm down and then start to talk with the being, also ask for forgiveness.With metta
Please see #9: “…Translated: ‘And what, bhikkhus, is the way leading to the cessation of identity? …”
Lal, you translate here “sakkāyanirodhagāminī paṭipadā” as “the way leading to the cessation of identity”. Does it mean that sakkaya means identity? Thus sakkaya ditthi is still identity view or me-view or self view?
As you say in #4: sakkāya is pañcupādānakkhandhā. Thus ditthi here is the wrong view that the five khandha are good and beneficial which is part of ditthi vipallasa.
That is clear, Lal. What I mean is this: #3 says that ALL wrong views are removed with removal of sakkaya ditthi. But this is not the case. The Sotapanna still has wrong views e.g. about kama raga. That is why the Sotapanna still enjoys watching a movie or having a big ice cream. In other words, the Sotapanna has established samma ditthi to a basic level but not to full extend. That means there are still ditthis but these are subtle forms.
In the same way you translate the sutta AN6.95 as: “A Sotapanna (or one with higher magga phala) accomplished in view (diṭṭhisampanno puggalo)…“, see #6. The term “accomplished in view” is used, which also means “perfect”. But a Sotapannas samma ditthi is not perfect but a basic level.
Link Nibbana exists
Post #11 says: “…But the fine body (trija kaya) of the gandhabba cannot “bear” the energy associated with an Arahant. In the same way, the fine bodies of a deva or a brahma also cannot….”
That means if a deva or a brahma attains Arahanthood it cannot live any longer and will immediately reach Parinibbana .
I wonder why those two words ‘anuloma’ and ‘patiloma’ mean forward/backward while in the post Sotapanna Anugami and a Sotapanna it is said:
#8 “…“anu” means “through the understanding of Tilakkhana”, “lo” means “craving for worldly things”, and “ma” means “removal”, and thus “anulōma” means “removal of craving for worldly things to some extent via the comprehension of Tilakkhana”.”
How to sort this?
