Longest padayatra ever

[Silverado]

4 minutes ago, Sachin200 said:

The Acharya invites a learned Buddhist Monk to a cup of coffee and of course, debate over respective Schools of Thought!]

Acharya: How was your day?

Buddhist Monk: The question is immaterial and irrelevant.

Acharya: Oh! Will you kindly state why do you say so?

Buddhist Monk: The workaday life is just a passing illusion. The so-called “manifold world” of material and mental elements arises solely through the causal co-operation of the transitory factors of existence (Called Dharmas) those depend functionally upon each other. Since, the material and mental universe arises through the concurrence of forces that are not permanent, the so-called World is not permanent. Everything that we call “world” are illusory, momentary. [He lays down the Sarvastivada, or, Sautrantika view of Buddhism]

Acharya: Oh. Heavy fire! Let me rephrase you. So what you are basically saying is that the perceived World is momentary; just an illusion – ever changing, and that there is no permanent essence of anything anywhere of the empirical Universe, be it mental or material, cognitive or non-perceptive.

Buddhist Monk: Yes, that’s the statement. Everything in the empirical world is only a stream of passing Dharmas, which are mere processes - impersonal and evanescent processes. These Dharmas can be characterized as Anatta (Anatma - Bereft of Self), i.e., being without a persisting self, without independent existence. [The Dharma theory of Buddhism]

Acharya: Ok. I get your point of view about momentariness, impermanence and Anatta. May I ask you a very simple question? When you started the sentence “The Question is immaterial and irrelevant” – it was immaterial and irrelevant to whom? What or who is the Subject to whom those perceptions appeared?

Buddhist Monk: (Enraged) To no one in particular. There is nothing more to this alleged (sic) world’s existence than the co-ordinated flux of wide variety of elemental, co-dependent factors (Dharmas), which bring forth collective experience of world-consciousness in individual and universal aspects. So, the perception occurred to some non-existent entity.

Acharya: Ok! Hypothetically accepting your view, tell me Monk, who is the witness to these arising of dependent elements? Who/what is the witness to the flux? Against what the flux is not static? If you are moving in a train at the same speed with another train, you will see both trains as stationary. A perception of speed requires comparison with a stationary object. Likewise, perception of flux requires a changeless object for measure of standard. Who/What is that?

Buddhist Monk: I object! What is the necessity of a Witness? That too, eternal permanent witness?! No way such a thing exists. People die and their trace vanishes, things get broken, Worlds get destroyed – all without leaving trace. Where is permanence?

Acharya: Hold your breath, Holy Monk. A witness is necessary in order to have a cognition of any phenomenon – take the event of your momentariness or flux. A witness can only say something is transitory or momentary. If there is no Witness, who would perceive and who would make a statement?

(This is one of the greatest novel argument of Acharya, his own contribution to logic and metaphysics – “Who is it that who sees and says Everything is impermanent – That entity has to present, existent and permanent”)

Buddhist Monk: If you say there has to be a Witness, who will witness that witness? How would you establish that Witness exists? What you say is wrong because there will be infinite regress. You say a Witness is necessary to claim cognizance. Fine, then tell me, who will say that there is a Witness? Where will this infinite loop end? In your Theory, everything has to be present to make the Witness known. This is nothing but Dependent Origination.

Acharya: Dear Friend, there is no logical necessity (Akanksha) for something to grasp the grasper. The witness stands self-proved. (This is one of the greatest sources of Pramana – Arthapatti as used by the Acharya)

Buddhist Monk: Even if there is any Witness, that entity; material or intellectual will be momentary, ever-changing, always in flux. So, one can’t say there is any witness at all.

Acharya: You seem to insinuate that everything is momentary and transitional – the flux keeps on changing every nano-second, the reality changing every nanosecond just like waves of sea erase the previous impressions in sand made by the preceding wave. So, who is there who perceives and makes this claim that Nothing is permanent?

And, against what standard you measure permanence relative to impermanence? Everything is impermanent relative to what? If everything if temporary, then how would the concept of any sort of permanence even arise? What is the ground for you to stand on? What is the reference point? Against what measuring rod will you judge impermanence?

Monk, Even to say Nothing exists, there has to be a relative plane of Existence. Else against what would you say Nothing exists, if you don’t know what Existence is? And when you say non-being is there – so logically, non-being exists – impermanence is permanently there, you are putting yourself in serious logical snare. Don’t you think by negating everything you are caught in an absurd redux? The entire Theory of Impermanence is erroneous.

Agreed what one sees or perceived is fleeting, transitory. But then how do you create your own locus standi for the transitoriness to be perceived? Who is the witness, the spectator? There has to be One. The primordial ground, the eternal essence, which is at the basis of everything and from which the whole world has arisen (the Brahman of the Upanishads). There is no void, all that exists is Fullness, Brahman. The world is not non-existent (Asat), but it is illusory (Mithya) meaning, it exist, but appears to us other than what is really is because of Ajanan (Ignorance), Avidya (Nescience) and Maya (Illusions)

 

lifted from quora Inka Chala undi discussion, to begin  

Okka mukka ardam raledu ,vidu evado @Ellen@zarathustra lage deep ga unadu

[Tatichettu_Tingarodu]

1 hour ago, Silverado said:

Anyways I respect Buddhism it is peaceful religion and born in india ,my icon is also from that religion

@TrollBaitis not coming to discuss abt cult religions

who is your icon 

[Silverado]

Just now, Tatichettu_Tingarodu said:

who is your icon 

BR ambedkar

[Ellen]

43 minutes ago, Sachin200 said:

 

 

lifted from quora Inka Chala undi discussion, to begin  

I read this debate before. Idi chaala weak debate. Aah monk ki asal em telidu. Adi shankara was much more intellectual than the monk here . Adi shankara's buddhist contemporaries were dumb because...hey see the timeline. By the time he even came...Buddhism mottam pollute aipoindi. so they are not equals to even sit for a debate. Gautama's successors largely misunderstood what Gautama was trying to preach..porbably Gautama himself matladi unte debate chala beautiful ga undedi emo. But Gautama will never argue to begin with 

[Silverado]

1 minute ago, Ellen said:

I read this debate before. Idi chaala weak debate. Aah monk ki asal em telidu. Adi shankara was much more intellectual than the monk here . Adi shankara's buddhist contemporaries were dumb because...hey see the timeline. By the time he even came...Buddhism mottam pollute aipoindi. so they are not equals to even sit for a debate. Gautama's successors largely misunderstood what Gautama was trying to preach..porbably Gautama himself matladi unte debate chala beautiful ga undedi emo. But Gautama will never argue to begin with 

Gautama always message why, to achieve boon from lord Shiva na?????

[Ellen]

@Sachin200

Aina history....chepte vinadame kani...tappo right o analyse cheyadam kastame. Because after all...they are tales given to us by ancestors. 

[Silverado]

Just now, Silverado said:

Gautama always meditatee why, to achieve boon from lord Shiva na?????

 

[Ellen]

Just now, Silverado said:

Gautama always message why, to achieve boon from lord Shiva na?????

Mana antha time ...internet appatlo lekunde isonti question lu adgadanki  ... Jokes apart Buddha NEVER mentioned shiva asal 

His message was simple and striaght forward:

"there is suffering in life; the cause of suffering is desire; ending desire means ending suffering; and following a controlled and moderate lifestyle will end desire, and therefore end suffering."

[Ellen]

2 minutes ago, Silverado said:

 

aipaaye...nuv correct chese lopu penta penta aindi  munde typos lekunda type cheste aipovu kada

[Silverado]

1 minute ago, Ellen said:

Mana antha time ...internet appatlo lekunde isonti question lu adgadanki  ... Jokes apart Buddha NEVER mentioned shiva asal 

His message was simple and striaght forward:

"there is suffering in life; the cause of suffering is desire; ending desire means ending suffering; and following a controlled and moderate lifestyle will end desire, and therefore end suffering."

Message kadu typo

Meditate

[Silverado]

1 minute ago, Ellen said:

aipaaye...nuv correct chese lopu penta penta aindi  munde typos lekunda type cheste aipovu kada

K matter single line speak saalu

[Ellen]

6 minutes ago, Silverado said:

Gautama always message why, to achieve boon from lord Shiva na?????

Definitely not. Enlightenment.. kosam. He practiced anapanasati to gain mindfulness  and concetration

[Silverado]

2 minutes ago, Ellen said:

Mana antha time ...internet appatlo lekunde isonti question lu adgadanki  ... Jokes apart Buddha NEVER mentioned shiva asal 

His message was simple and striaght forward:

"there is suffering in life; the cause of suffering is desire; ending desire means ending suffering; and following a controlled and moderate lifestyle will end desire, and therefore end suffering."

Ayana chepinavi naku telusu gani

Ala kallu muskoni vunte emostadi evaridagaraki Ayina velli nerchukovachu ga

[Ellen]

Just now, Silverado said:

Ayana chepinavi naku telusu gani

Ala kallu muskoni vunte emostadi evaridagaraki Ayina velli nerchukovachu ga

time unnapudu explain chesta single line lo mindfulness gurinchi cheppdam kastam. By the way...meditation hinduism la kuda unnadi. so akkadi nundi tavvu  

[Sachin200]

19 minutes ago, Ellen said:

@Sachin200

Aina history....chepte vinadame kani...tappo right o analyse cheyadam kastame. Because after all...they are tales given to us by ancestors. 

Agree , history was spread through word of mouth / transfer of writings . No one is not completely sure the parts of the information completely removed , manipulated or misinterpreted . 

Like Ramayana , no one can have original scripture  written by valmiki currently . It is re-written by scholars under the name valmiki ramayanam