Howard Is
Lucky Mud
Do you recall his conversation with the horse trainer ?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Should we even try describe?
- Thread starter Spirit of Light
- Start date
Do you recall his conversation with the horse trainer ?
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
If a person has a very good inborn quality they could become enlightened in one lifetime, but most of the humans are not naturally at that level of inborn quality, so most of us will need more then one lifetime to become enlightened, but you can say that it looks like one lifetime since if a person does enlighten this lifetime who would think he/she may be used 2 or 3 lifes to get there.
Can i ask what sutta you referred to when you say Buddha said it would take a lot less time
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Is that in Theravada scriptures or Mahayana scriptures? If it is Mahayana i would not know
Howard Is
Lucky Mud
How Buddha Taught (Part 2) - The Horse Trainer
Once, a horse trainer by the name of Kesi came to visit the Buddha.
Seeing Kesi, The Buddha asked him :
"Kesi, you are an expert in the training of horses. What do you do to train an untamed horse?"
"O Venerable Sir, I'll train the horse softly first.
At times, I train horses harshly, too.
Other times, I may train it both softly and harshly."
"Kesi, if you cannot train the horse in all 3 ways, what would you do ?"
"Sir, if I cannot train it in any one of those methods above, I will kill it so that my tradition of training will not be tarnished."
Then, Kesi asked the Buddha,
"Sir, I am described as 'assadamma sarathi' - expert in training horses.
Whereas you, Sir, is described as 'Purisa Damma Sarathi' - the expert in the training of men.
Just now, I described to you how I tame horses. Can you tell me how you train men?"
"Certainly," replied the Buddha.
"Kesi, I too train them in soft, kind manner.
But I train them in harsh ways, too.
Sometimes, I'll mix the 2 methods - both soft and harsh."
"But Venerable Sir, what if you cannot train someone using all these 3 methods? What would you do?"
"Kesi, I will 'kill' him," said the Buddha.
Startled, Kesi asked, "But Sir ! Isn't it unseemly for Buddhas to kill? They must not kill, is it not, Sir?"
Smiling kindly, the Buddha said in a reassuring tone, "Yes, that is true, Kesi...
What I mean by 'killing' is : If I cannot train him in all those 3 methods, I will refrain from instructing him - from advising him. I will give him up as a person to be advised or taught.
Setting aside a person, refraining from advising him both by myself and my disciples, is, in terms of the code of Discipline of the Noble Buddhist Dispensation, like 'killing'. It is the most severe punishment."
(Anguttara Nikaya - Catukka Nipata - Kesi Sutta)
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
Thank you
i going to be honest and say it is long time i read this sutta so i might have gotten it wrong in my understanding of the teaching when it comes to this part
leov
Well-Known Member
"For to the one who has, more will be given, and he will have an abundance, but from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away." I think we have to seek God, seek explanations.
This makes no sense to me.To understand God or Buddha take a lifetime
- "what's the most important thing in your life?"
- "God."
- "what do you mean by 'God'?"
- "I have no idea right now, but I'm hopeful that I'll know by the time I'm on my deathbed."
Terry Sampson
Well-Known Member
Well, susanblange does, but nobody believes her.
Howard Is
Lucky Mud
Thank you
You're welcome.
This is the final section of Maha-satipatthana Sutta: The Great Frames of Reference
(E. Conclusion)
"Now, if anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven years, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.
"Let alone seven years. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for six years... five... four... three... two years... one year... seven months... six months... five... four... three... two months... one month... half a month, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.
"Let alone half a month. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven days, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return.
"'This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding — in other words, the four frames of reference.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said."
That is what the Blessed One said. Gratified, the monks delighted in the Blessed One's words.
Erebus
Well-Known Member
I couldn't tell you. I don't belong to a faith which frowns on describing the gods so this is outside my experience.
Terry Sampson
Well-Known Member
Skwim
Veteran Member
Why not? From all that I can tell god is a human invention and therefore can be given whatever attributes we care bestow on him/her/it.
Don't see why not.
Subjectivity means that "right" cannot be established
between 2 people with differing views.
Howard Is
Lucky Mud
That’s what lawyers are for.
MonkeyFire
Well-Known Member
Buddha is a word/thing... a buddha nature.
syo
Well-Known Member
the nicene creed gives a fine explanation what god is. at least, the christian god. should we reject it?
Lawyers seldom determine what is right.
They just fight until the client runs out of money.
Spirit of Light
Be who ever you want
If someone has not seen what they are describing, and merely replicating what some book told them, then Chinese Whispers is what religious conversation generally is about.
If someone comes down here from higher dimensions (Bodhisattva) or has been to the other side (Tathagata/some Near Death Experiences), it does give us a collective ability to discuss what exists.
Like for example, Dr Eben Alexander describes the Oneness of Heaven the same as I would; it is enthralled by its descriptions, it is beyond word and sounds, as all energy is manifest from there.
So we as humans have described, and should dissect, and question what exists... Calling it a religion misses the point, and divides us, whilst understanding of reality is a universal exploration for all of us.
Certain things can be quantified, yet in doing so we limit the ultimate potential of many other facets.
So for example:
God is like a CPU that manifests the constructs of our reality at a quantum level...
Because I've said a computer, many people in discussions on Paltalk, jump into full simulated reality theory, some to renditions of the Matrix film.
Buddha (Discernment) is an aspect of the Divine Qualities of the Source...
There will be opposing values, that it creates by its mere interaction; so words limit the potential to fully describe, due to there always being an equal & opposite reaction.
In my opinion.
QuestioningMind
Well-Known Member
As an atheist I've always found it hard to comprehend how some theists can state that they believe in an entity that they also claim cannot ever be understood.