End destiny of man and life in Buddhism.

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man... definitions of terms and what is every life form after?

Thanks, Vaj, for your input.

About definitions of terms like man and life and also the choice of a philosophy, the problem is who are to be taken as most to be depended upon for definitions and for the choice of a philosophy? What about the sentient beings who at present are not into dialog with man, like say dolphins and apes?

Dear Francis King, I would agree with your kind of end destiny for man and life, for which except that women don't get it like menfolk, the Muslims' paradise seems to be the most inviting.

So, if we just also include women in paradise with the same privileges as us guys, that will be just fine for everyone -- of course we have to change our psycho-moral values so that we can do away with feeling oh so carnal. Isn't that what modern science and medical technology has changed morality, so that people don't have to get babies if they don't want to; and no one is now complaining at least not as as bad as in the pre control of birth days about guys and gals living in without a license from the government.


Susma

 

[Eudaimonist]

Re: End destiny of man... Let's start with what is meaningful for each of us.

Maybe you would like to start with what is not meaningful to you? instead of what is meaningful to you -- for I seem to see that for Buddhists they tend to see what is not meaningful than what is meaningful, what about non-Buddhists?

The end destiny of the human race is not particularly meaningful to me. I simply hope that -- whatever it is -- it doesn't happen for many millions of years, since "end destiny" to me implies extinction. Instead of speculating as to what it might be, I'm content to let it be an unknown for now.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man... Let's start with what is meaningful for each of us.

The end destiny of the human race is not particularly meaningful to me. I simply hope that -- whatever it is -- it doesn't happen for many millions of years, since "end destiny" to me implies extinction. Instead of speculating as to what it might be, I'm content to let it be an unknown for now.


eudaimonia,

Mark

But wouldn't you like to be around, at least to witness out of curiosity?

For my part I want to put it on record that I am most unabashedly and most interested in being around when the end destiny of man and life has arrived -- there's nothing like satisfying curiosity.

In another forum someone tells me that curiosity killed the cat, and I tell him that this cat is not killed yet.

I certainly would like to contribute to my presence in the end destiny of man and life when that time arrives.


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

See my new thread on "the greatness of Gautama, why?"


Susma

 

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man and life... from Sri Lanka.

I have come across a website on Buddhism to all appearances from a Sri Lanka source, not from Westerners engaged in Buddhism.

You see, when you read about Buddhism from Westerners, they tend to overlook what they find unacceptable in the churches of the West which also appears in Buddhism.

Sri Lanka, formerly Ceylon, is the quintessential traditional Buddhist homeland, Unless I am mistaken, it is the source or place where the much vaunted Pali Canon of Buddhism was confected, maybe in the 6th century Common Era -- correct me if I am in fact mistaken.

The author(s) of this website seem to me to explain Buddhism without trying to deodorize Buddhism to make it smell fragrantly to Westerners who can't tolerate any supernaturalism or superstitions in religions.

It has a page on Buddhist cosmology and Nirvana which I think is quite simply but also to my impression fairly explained, with all the self-doubts of the authors thrown in.

A Modern Introduction to the Buddha's Teaching
Buddhist Cosmology and Nibbâna
Buddhism in Sri Lanka - Buddhist Cosmology and Nibbâna​

From the title of the page itself, I think I have been right all along to say that Nirvana or Nibbana is the end destiny of man and life in Buddhism; and that is why I am wondering why Buddhists here don't want to come out openly and say so?

I said that the authors of this website throw in their self-doubts about Buddhism in their writings in explanation and advocacy of Buddhism, consider this line from the first paragraph of the page on Buddhist cosmology and Nirvana.

[Lines in bold provided by the undersigned.]

The Buddhist scriptures contain a cosmology of the Universe which provide an interesting contrast to the cosmologies of other religions (e.g. that of the Bible) and even the modern scientific cosmology (on which there is no complete agreement). The cosmological claims in the Buddhist scriptures should not be seen as an accurate description of the physical universe, but as establishing the stage on which the great sasâric drama is enacted. While considering this cosmology we may also consider the important concept of Nibbâna which is the state of final release. The latter term is better known in its Sanskrit version as "Nirvana". We shall use the Pali term because the concept of Nirvana is also used in other Indian religions notably Jainism.

I will bring up the main points of Buddhist cosmology and Nirvana from this Sri Lankan website, in order to discern the major skylines of the end destiny for man and life in Buddhism.


Susma

 

[moseslmpg]

Well, of course if you look only at one source, they will have a more concrete answer than a survey of all the sources. And Nirvana is not the end destiny of man in Buddhism for two reasons:

1. Not everyone will reach Nirvana in the context of a definite time cycle. I.e. you don't just go to Nirvana at the "end of the world."

2. From what I understand, Buddhism does not view the world and existence as having a beginning or end. Nor does it see things as eternal per se.

So there is not really any end destiny like in Christianity or Judaism or other Western religions. The end goal of Buddhism is for everyone to become enlightened, which I presume would cause all phenomenal existence to cease, so if anything is close to the "end destiny" it is enlightenment.

 

[samabudhi]

Sri Lanka, formerly Ceylon, is the quintessential traditional Buddhist homeland, Unless I am mistaken, it is the source or place where the much vaunted Pali Canon of Buddhism was confected, maybe in the 6th century Common Era -- correct me if I am in fact mistaken.

You won't find a pure land on this earth. There isn't an inch of samsara that is free from war, perversion, crime, change - much less an island state injected with scriptures and separated from the evolving Buddhist traditions in Northern India. Basing the efficacy of the teachings on the environment (which Buddha renounced) is like declaring the beauty of a lotus by looking at the pool of mud it grows from.

Nirvana is a term used by Buddha's contempories. He uses the word only to place it in context.
If you want to understand early Buddhism, you really need to read the Digha Nikaya.
Unfortunately there are no complete translations on the web, but this is a good start:
Digha Nikaya

 

[Eudaimonist]

Re: End destiny of man... Let's start with what is meaningful for each of us.

But wouldn't you like to be around, at least to witness out of curiosity?

I am equally curious about beginnings and middles. Since I don't have a time machine, I am content to satisfy my curiosity by witnessing the current part of the middle.

If I had a time machine, I would make lots of journeys.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Francis king]

buddha was an indian- from india... well, okay, from some region on the border with nepal, but its still blooming india... in theory, the teachings should have been written down in sanskrit or some kind of nepalese or indian prakrit, but no-the oldest teachings of buddha, were written on palm leaf paper in the language of pali, which is, in my humble opinion, just a crap version of sanskrit, and they were supposedly written down about 200 years or so after the buddhas death by some theravadins in ceylon, which was also India- before it became Sri Lanka...

I hate pali with a vengeance, its a crap language, and it can't make its mind up what it wants to say... does anyone here do pali or sanskrit? just curious, like...

 

[17th Angel]

Re: End destiny of man... Let's start with what is meaningful for each of us.

If I had a time machine, I would make lots of journeys.

If I had a time machine, I would make lots of money....

 

[jiii]

in theory, the teachings should have been written down in sanskrit or some kind of nepalese or indian prakrit, but no...

I hate pali with a vengeance, its a crap language, and it can't make its mind up what it wants to say... does anyone here do pali or sanskrit? just curious, like...

LOL...what's so bad about Pali? From my understanding, Pali is, in fact, a type of Indian Prakrit, with which you seem to be much more at ease.

 

[Francis king]

well, pali is crap imho, because it doesn't have the same rules as sanskrit, it aint as structured, and translating pali into sanskrit isn't as easy as it should be, which then makes what buddha says open to a greater degree of interpretation than average...

 

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man... I wanna make a lot of dough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eudaimonist
If I had a time machine, I would make lots of journeys.​

If I had a time machine, I would make lots of money....

I also like to make a lot of money, that makes two of us; and I am always looking for ways and means to make lots of money with the least work, the quickest way, and of course the safest.

People tell us from routine wisdom that money does not bring happiness, or at the end everyone dies.

About the first, I will decide when I have made a lot of money or when a lot of money by luck or chance comes my way, and I have made good use (in my judgment of good) of a a lot of money.

About the second, has anyone noticed the fallacy in that line, that at the end everyone dies?


No, Buddhism is not for me, because it's all about being liberated from desires, cravings, wants, or even needs? Liberated, did I say? More like self-deprivation than liberation.


So, they tell always us that rich people are not happy and are met with a lot of miseries. I will not be deterred; you see I will work to be an exception. Hahaha.


This is addressed to Buddhists, with a pound of wit and humor: if the rest of mankind follow Buddhists and give up their desires and even needs, and leave us money-hankering guys to ourselves to enjoy all the wealth of the earth, that should be most welcome to me; even if that will leave only 5 percent of present mankind -- 5% of five billions, that translates to 5,000,000,000 x .05 = 50,000,000 humans, still too much humans to parcel among themselves the extant wealth of the earth?

Wait, is my math correct? Let me know.


Susma

 

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man and life in Buddhism.. Sanskrit vs Pali

Before anything else, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

well, pali is crap imho, because it doesn't have the same rules as sanskrit, it aint as structured, and translating pali into sanskrit isn't as easy as it should be, which then makes what buddha says open to a greater degree of interpretation than average...

I am thinking of doing a new thread on scripture and tradition in Buddhism.

I have noticed from hits with Google that there is practically nothing about scripture vs tradition in Buddhism, which is of terrific and terrible import in Christianity; but I would imagine that there is certain to be also terrific and terrible controversies over scripture and tradition in Buddhism, because it is the same kind -- only one kind -- of humans in Christianity as in Buddhism.

Guys who can read Pali and Sanskrit, look out for that thread from yours truly


Susma

 

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man... correction, please, and apologies.

. . . .

This is addressed to Buddhists, with a pound of wit and humor: if the rest of mankind follow Buddhists and give up their desires and even needs, and leave us money-hankering guys to ourselves to enjoy all the wealth of the earth, that should be most welcome to me; even if that will leave only 5 percent of present mankind -- 5% of five billions, that translates to 5,000,000,000 x .05 = 50,000,000 humans, still too much humans to parcel among themselves the extant wealth of the earth?

Wait, is my math correct? Let me know.


Susma

...5,000,000,000 x .05 = 50,000,000 humans...

Wrong! on two counts, wrong population figure and wrong math.

World POPClock Projection

According to the International Programs Center, U.S. Bureau of the Census, the total population of the World, projected to 12/25/06 at 04:53 GMT (EST+5) is


6,565,451,606

World POPClock Projection

Correct: 6,565,451,606 x .05 = 328,272,580 -- still too many humans.


Susma

 

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man and life in Buddhism.. skirting the issue.

Well, of course if you look only at one source, they will have a more concrete answer than a survey of all the sources. And Nirvana is not the end destiny of man in Buddhism for two reasons:

1. Not everyone will reach Nirvana in the context of a definite time cycle. I.e. you don't just go to Nirvana at the "end of the world."

2. From what I understand, Buddhism does not view the world and existence as having a beginning or end. Nor does it see things as eternal per se.

So there is not really any end destiny like in Christianity or Judaism or other Western religions. The end goal of Buddhism is for everyone to become enlightened, which I presume would cause all phenomenal existence to cease, so if anything is close to the "end destiny" it is enlightenment.

1. Not everyone will reach Nirvana in the context of a definite time cycle. I.e. you don't just go to Nirvana at the "end of the world."

2. From what I understand, Buddhism does not view the world and existence as having a beginning or end. Nor does it see things as eternal per se. ​

About #1, there have been Buddhists who have reached Nirvana, for example, Gautama himself. So when you look at his history in time, he did fill up a definitely fixed time duration which had its beginning when he came into existence as a sentient being, and its ending when he arrived at or achieved final Nirvana for having died in the state of Nirvana (from eating spoiled meat, incidentally -- according to the report...).

And since Buddhists also admit that the number of sentient beings is finite; moreover, all sentient beings will shorter or longer and longer (but not never) attain Nirvana; so there is an end term to man and life. Please correct me if I am wrong.

About #2, I have done enough reading about time in Buddhism and also in Hinduism, to learn that there is indeed admitted a beginning in time but it is pushed back farther and farther and farther and farther... that Buddhist and Hinduist thinkers give the impression that they don't want to face the beginning of time; and it is admitted also that there is an end in time but also pushed indefinitely forward and forward and forward...

This strategy of evading seems to be a gimmick that is accepted in Buddhist and Hinduist thinking to be valid and legitimate; but in my stock knowledge not acceptable in Western thinking: either say that time is infinite or it's not, but don't say that the beginning is farther and farther back and the ending is farther and farther forward -- unless that is their way of saying farther and farther ad infinitum (in which case, then say so; but that again is what I find typical with Buddhist and Hinduist thinking, evasion).

Consider the Buddhist and Hinduist doctrine of karma: a man's present lot in his current rebirth is dependent upon his actions in previous rebirths.

Now, ask Buddhists and Hinduists: when did the man ever get started to begin the karma of rebirths into succeeding lives which are determined by previous actions in past rebirths, i.e., ever get started prior to any birth where he had committed already actions determining his karma.

Tell me what answer you will get.


Susma

 

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man and life in Buddhism... what? no Nirvana?

. . . .

Nirvana is a term used by Buddha's contempories. He uses the word only to place it in context.

. . . . .

More and more I am coming to a certainty that Eastern Buddhism and Western Buddhism are like twins that will never meet.

You mean Buddha, Gautama, never taught about Nirvana as aspired after and worked for by Buddhist monks in the sanghas of Burma, Thailand, and Sri Lanka?


Susma

 

[samabudhi]

You mean Buddha, Gautama, never taught about Nirvana as aspired after and worked for by Buddhist monks in the sanghas of Burma, Thailand, and Sri Lanka?

Nirvana is the opposite of samsara, and is an extreme. Buddha Shakyamuni taught the middle way beyond extremes.

 

[Susma Rio Sep]

Re: End destiny of man and life in Buddhism... selective Buddhism.

Quote:
You mean Buddha, Gautama, never taught about Nirvana as aspired after and worked for by Buddhist monks in the sanghas of Burma, Thailand, and Sri Lanka?​

Nirvana is the opposite of samsara, and is an extreme. Buddha Shakyamuni taught the middle way beyond extremes. -- samabudhi​

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

You mean that Nirvana is a dispensable doctrine in the Buddhism as taught by the founder, Gautama; so also rebirth? What about karma?

Wouldn't that be overly watering down Buddhism as to be beyond recognition except for the name?

Tell me if I amy ask you, good man Samabudhi, you really don't accept karma, rebirth, and Nirvana? In which case I am right to say that Western Buddhists have stripped Buddhism of everything original with the traditional Buddhism of the Far East, except what, psychotherapy?

This is what also I notice in the webpage of some kind of missionary from the West in Mongolia, from a Richard Gere Foundation, for the spread or revival of Buddhism in Mongolia.

Meeting the Challenge of Modernization in Mongolia

The Berzin Archives - Meeting the Challenge of Modernization in Mongolia

Alexander Berzin

prepared at the request of the Mongolian Press
Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia, August 1997

I have come to Mongolia to continue work in two areas that I had begun during my last visit in November 1996. I have been asked by the Richard Gere Foundation to establish and organize a large project in Mongolia to help with the revival of Buddhism. The main focus of this project is to translate basic books on Buddhism from English into modern colloquial Mongolian, and then to publish and distribute them throughout the country. This visit has been specifically to establish the administrative infrastructure for the project and to make the printing arrangements. The second purpose of my visit has been to continue lecturing on Buddhism at the request of the National University of Mongolia and Gandan Monastery.

Read the rest of the article.

What do you say, don't you find it paradoxical and ironic that the author is in charge of translating Buddhist texts from English to contemporary Mongolian; and I was saying that I like to examine the issue if any of scripture and tradition in Buddhism. Now this translating of Buddhist texts already redacted into English, into current colloquial Mongolian speech, that is going to further muddle up the challenge of establishing what is scripture in Buddhism and what tradition.

When you read the rest of the article you will realize that it is bereft of doctrines on karma, rebirth, and Nirvana, and more on modernizing Mongolia: one focus is teaching Mongolians to be clean and not smelly -- no offense intended from the undersigned though; read on that heading of Buddhism and hygiene.

But tell me, samabudhi, you do believe that Gautama got his ideas through enlightenment and therefore arrived at certainty of the facts and truths of his teachings; but you exclude karma, rebirth, and Nirvana which also had been certified in him by his attainment of enlightenment, also spelled Nirvana.

Just being humorous, maybe good man samabudhi, you just may not have arrived at enlightenment yet -- spell that Nirvana.

Anyway, I find it most interesting that Buddhism is undergoing an upheaval of a change in the West which will be a Nirvana-less Buddhism.


No more end destiny for man and life in the universe... So, what is the end of man and life if any? except death and the grave, period?


Susma

 

[samabudhi]

An eternity of delusion.
By the power of all the Tathagatha's, may this be dispelled and the gates of deathlessness be open to you.

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Susma,

thank you for the post.

And since Buddhists also admit that the number of sentient beings is finite;

i would be curious to see your source for this. such a conception is certainly founded upon the idea that there are such thing as sentient beings... we certainly speak of such, but that is more a matter of linguistic convention than anything else.

moreover, all sentient beings will shorter or longer and longer (but not never) attain Nirvana; so there is an end term to man and life. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Nibbana/Nirvana is *not* the final fruit of the path, Susma, regardless of how much such information does not conform to your view. Nibbana/Nirvana is a temporary expedient, as are all of the Buddhas teachings. This is declared plainly in several Suttas.

About #2, I have done enough reading about time in Buddhism and also in Hinduism, to learn that there is indeed admitted a beginning in time but it is pushed back farther and farther and farther and farther... that Buddhist and Hinduist thinkers give the impression that they don't want to face the beginning of time; and it is admitted also that there is an end in time but also pushed indefinitely forward and forward and forward...

can you explain the concept of "beginning" in a cyclical universe?

the Buddhist cosmological point of view varies a bit depending on the particular philosophical school that a being may uphold. that said, in the same manner that speaking of a beginning of a cyclical universe, Buddhism speaks of the end of the universe... again, however, the idea of "end" is simply the ending of one universe and the arising of another.. not true "beginning" and "end" as is commonly thought by beings which adhere to a linear concept of time.

Consider the Buddhist and Hinduist doctrine of karma: a man's present lot in his current rebirth is dependent upon his actions in previous rebirths.

would you believe that you have not understood this properly?

in point of fact, the Buddha specifically addresses this very misconception, to wit:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Refuting the erroneous view that "whatsoever fortune or misfortune experienced is all due to some previous action", the Buddha said: [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"So, then, according to this view, owing to previous action men will become murderers, thieves, unchaste, liars, slanderers, covetous, malicious and perverts. Thus, for those who fall back on the former deeds as the essential reason, there is neither the desire to do, nor effort to do, nor necessity to do this deed, or abstain from this deed." [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It was this important text, which states the belief that all physical circumstances and mental attitudes spring solely from past Karma that Buddha contradicted. If the present life is totally conditioned or wholly controlled by our past actions, then certainly Karma is tantamount to fatalism or determinism or predestination. If this were true, free will would be an absurdity. Life would be purely mechanistic, not much different from a machine. Being created by an Almighty God who controls our destinies and predetermines our future, or being produced by an irresistible Karma that completely determines our fate and controls our life’s course, independent of any free action on our part, is essentially the same. The only difference lies in the two words God and Karma. One could easily be substituted for the other, because the ultimate operation of both forces would be identical.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Such a fatalistic doctrine is not the Buddhist law of Karma. [/FONT]

Basic Buddhism: The Theory of Karma


"If anyone says that a man or woman must reap in this life according to his present deeds, in that case there is no religious life, nor is an opportunity afforded for the entire extinction of sorrow. But if anyone says that what a man or woman reaps in this and future lives accords with his or her deeds present and past, in that case there is a religious life, and an opportunity is afforded for the entire extinction of a sorrow." (Anguttara Nikaya)


the Buddha Dharma and Santana Dharma have different views on Kamma/Karma... if you have questions for the Sanatana Dharma adherents, please pose your question in the correct area or i suspect it will not garner the sort of response you are hoping for.

metta,

~v