If "everything is energy" then what does this mean?

[godnotgod]

I can confirm that this is a dodgy translation.....

Oh, suddenly you are world-famous Professor of Linguistics. Wonderful. Then it will be no problem for you to point us all to the documentation of your *cough* 'confirmation'.

Your papers, please.

What's that? The dog did what?

 

[godnotgod]

I can confirm that this is a dodgy translation, desperately quote-mined in a vain attempt to support a misrepresentation. Which is par for the course unfortunately.

I have repeatedly and clearly demonstrated that Nirvana is not an absolute like Brahman and Tao, but of course these demonstrations are studiously ignored by new-agers and woolly syncretists, people with an agenda to misrepresent.

To say that Nirvana is not an absolute is an absolute itself.

I have posted the words of the Buddha himself stating that Nirvana is The Absolute, which you continue to ignore.

 

[metis]

"Nirvana" is more of an unknown than a known, and is partially based on the concept that the energy that which composes us simply doesn't disappear. Buddhists themselves often debate this with knowledge that there's gonna be different thoughts on this, with many taking the position of whatever will be, will be.

Again, to be clear, there are no creeds in Buddhism, and one is encouraged to go in the direction of their experiences and observations, and to say "I don't know" isn't a weakness if one doesn't know.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Again, to be clear, there are no creeds in Buddhism, and one is encouraged to go in the direction of their experiences and observations, and to say "I don't know" isn't a weakness if one doesn't know.

Unfortunately there are some non-Buddhists who think they know more about Buddhist teachings than the people who actually practice those teachings. This attitude is patronising and arrogant.

Then there are others who shamelessly misrepresent Buddhist teachings in pursuit of a personal agenda. New-agers and woolly syncretists are the worst offenders. This attitude is just plain dishonest.

 

[Aupmanyav]

"Nirvana" is more of an unknown than a known, ..

Nirvana is not an unknown. Buddha knew that he was ready for nirvana, but refused it for the benefit of the people. Yes, for most others, it will be an unknown.

 

[YmirGF]

I can confirm that this is a dodgy translation, desperately quote-mined in a vain attempt to support a misrepresentation. Which is par for the course unfortunately.

I have repeatedly and clearly demonstrated that Nirvana is not an absolute like Brahman and Tao, but of course these demonstrations are studiously ignored by new-agers and woolly syncretists, people with an agenda to misrepresent.

I'm with you, Rick. Heck, I'm even on record as saying, several times now, that Nirvana does NOT exist and that is it part of "Buddha's little joke". (The joke is that as the student plunges down the rabbit hole of inner reality they will discover many wild and fascinating things. They will never reach a "fabled land" called Nirvana (That is metaphorical, for the dim witted,) Buddha knew that the student would find all these things in pursuit of the legendary Nirvana and would be handsomely rewarded for their efforts. He knew that demanding a refund for the process because there is no Nirvana as billed in the glossy brochures would never enter their minds because at that point they would be in on the joke too and would never dream of spoiling it for those still behind them.)

So, yeah, I do agree that "nirvana" is not an absolute, but is a placeholder symbol for the unknown. It's so liberating to drop attachments to ideas and simply be, here, now. So simple... even a fool can do it.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Buddha knew that he was ready for nirvana, but refused it for the benefit of the people.

According to the suttas the Buddha attained Nibbana and then proceeded to teach, so I find your comment puzzling.
Perhaps you are confusing Nibbana with pari-Nibbana ( death )?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

So, yeah, I do agree that "nirvana" is not an absolute, but is a placeholder symbol for the unknown. It's so liberating to drop attachments to ideas and simply be, here, now. So simple... even a fool can do it.

It seems that some people are simply incapable of dropping the attachments and mental baggage. It's like they need a head full of Pretentious Proper Nouns to cope, and in some cases have an overwhelming need to share their mental junk-yard with the rest of us. No thanks!

 

[Aupmanyav]

Perhaps you are confusing Nibbana with pari-Nibbana ( death )?

Have it this way, but that does not change the situation. He knew that he was a 'tathagata'.

 

[YmirGF]

It seems that some people are simply incapable of dropping the attachments and mental baggage. It's like they need a head full of Pretentious Proper Nouns to cope, and in some cases have an overwhelming need to share their mental junk-yard with the rest of us. No thanks!

I think the appeal in all this quackery is that it gives a sense of certainty to a process that is not certain and has no guarantees. It's really just clinging. Amusing to watch, but clinging, nonetheless. Those who cling to the PPN's simply demonstrate that they are still using inner training wheels and have nothing of substance (pun intended, for the dim) to offer. The newbie is prone to exaggeration and feigns certainty. It's just a feature of the game at a certain stage of inner development.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Have it this way, but that does not change the situation. He knew that he was a 'tathagata'.

He knew he was a tathagata when he attained Nibbana. .

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I think the appeal in all this quackery is that it gives a sense of certainty to a process that is not certain and has no guarantees. It's really just clinging. Amusing to watch, but clinging, nonetheless.

Yes, clinging to beliefs and clutching at metaphysical straws. I also sense an element of wishful thinking, what I call the "There must be more than this" syndrome ( though ironically this gets in the way of seeing how amazing the present moment can be ).

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yeah, I know because I too have attained 'nirvana', 'moksha'. A little problem in presentation does not worry me at all.

 

[YmirGF]

Have it this way, but that does not change the situation. He knew that he was a 'tathagata'.

Anyone who has been "There" could easily and honestly use the title of "tathagata". I highly doubt Buddha used it in an exclusive sense.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Yeah, I know because I too have attained 'nirvana', 'moksha'.

So you're a Buddha? Completely free from craving, aversion and delusion? Full insight into sunyata?

 

[YmirGF]

Yeah, I know because I too have attained 'nirvana', 'moksha'. A little problem in presentation does not worry me at all.

And that is what I've grown to love about your thinking, Aupmanyav. There is an authenticity and honesty to your comments that is sadly lacking in the comments of others.

 

[YmirGF]

So you're a Buddha? Completely free from craving, aversion and delusion?

But Rick, who isn't?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

But Rick, who isn't?

I am certainly not a Buddha. Occasionally you stumble across them on internet discussion forums I suppose.

 

[YmirGF]

I am certainly not a Buddha. Occasionally you stumble across them on internet discussion forums I suppose.

Not as often as we stumble onto yet another who claims to be Jesus, speak for Jesus or is a conduit for "god", all with blissfully stupid messages to impart, in the worst grammar and spelling imaginable.

If asked, I'd simply steal a line from Francis Urquhart, "You might very well think that; I couldn't possibly comment".


What I meant in my comments to @Aupmanyav , was at least he is honest unlike the continual dishonesty we see emanating from one particular poster. Again, in my view he has an inherent authenticity that is sadly lacking in the rhetoric of a few other posters.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

What I meant in my comments to @Aupmanyav , was at least he is honest unlike the continual dishonesty we see emanating from one particular poster. Again, in my view he has an inherent authenticity that is sadly lacking in the rhetoric of a few other posters.

Oh yes, I agree.

Anyway I am bored with this thread now, could we discuss something else? Like the increasing frequency of aggressive begging by by seagulls in British seaside towns, nobody's fish and chips is safe...