Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Thread: Sharing thoughts about this sutta

  1. #11
    Forums Member Sam Vara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Sussex, United Kingdom
    Posts
    24
    Please quote where the Buddha called 'kamma' a 'niyama'. Thanks
    I don't know where he did, I'm afraid. If he called it that you can probably find it yourself by Googling. My point is not that he called it that, but that he presented it as that.

    These niyama are from commentaries rather than from Buddha.
    That's right. I find commentaries useful.

    According to the Buddha, kamma can operate through a specific, proximate cause, as he says that kamma determines where we are born, our state of health, and when we die -
    Non-sense. This thread has many suttas posted in it. None of them support this.
    But I believe that others do, such as the Cula-kammavibhanga Sutta where the Buddha says that kamma shapes the physical body, length of life, psychological predispositions and life chances of the next existence.

    AN 6.63 states kamma is intention. It is not intention to be killed by a runaway truck.
    You're right. The intention is not to be killed by the runaway truck, but if one's death is determined by the quality of one's kamma, one's intention is a causal factor in that instance.

    You are misunderstanding this sutta. The sutta states the sense organs: "ought to be be viewed as old kamma". it does not say they are actually old kamma. I suggest to study the Pali more carefully.
    Maybe I am misunderstanding it, but if the Buddha told people they ought to view something as old kamma, I would need a good reason to think that he meant that particular something was not old kamma. The common-sense interpretation of this is that things ought to be viewed as they are.

    A general point, if I may, about the overall tone of your post. You appear to have amended it now, deleting the term "non-sense" and toning down what looks like a good deal of aggression. That's good. But you need to think about this. I'm just offering my opinion on a particular text or idea that was offered, ostensibly for that purpose. I'm not interested in converting people to my view, or criticising what other contributors think. If we can gain some extra understanding or inspiration from one another's posts, then that's all to the good. If there is a particular "party line" that contributors have to take, then I obviously missed it. I'll continue to respond honestly and politely to what I read here, but I won't put up with rudeness of the sort that you want to engage in. I'll just go elsewhere.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by SamVara
    A general point, if I may, about the overall tone of your post. You appear to have amended it now, deleting the term "non-sense" and toning down what looks like a good deal of aggression. That's good. But you need to think about this. I'm just offering my opinion on a particular text or idea that was offered, ostensibly for that purpose. I'm not interested in converting people to my view, or criticising what other contributors think. If we can gain some extra understanding or inspiration from one another's posts, then that's all to the good. If there is a particular "party line" that contributors have to take, then I obviously missed it. I'll continue to respond honestly and politely to what I read here, but I won't put up with rudeness of the sort that you want to engage in. I'll just go elsewhere.
    Hi Sam,

    I think in general, that if someone reflects on and amends what they've written, then its really not a case for pulling them up on it, since words which might have offended, no longer exist.

    Lets just return to the topic and try to get on with each other, even if we have different views, and enjoy the time we have here, and the humanity we share.


  3. #13
    Forums Member Sam Vara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Sussex, United Kingdom
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Aloka View Post
    Hi Sam,

    I think in general, that if someone reflects on and amends what they've written, then its really not a case for pulling them up on it, since words which might have offended, no longer exist.

    Lets just return to the topic and try to get on with each other, even if we have different views, and enjoy the time we have here, and the humanity we share.



    I agree with the general point you make, but the offending words were not changed until I was (politely) responding to them, and indeed are still in existence - in the bits I quoted. I can of course just ignore aggression and rudeness, but there is no reason for me to post here if it continues.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam Vara View Post
    I agree with the general point you make, but the offending words were not changed until I was (politely) responding to them, and indeed are still in existence - in the bits I quoted. I can of course just ignore aggression and rudeness, but there is no reason for me to post here if it continues.
    I'm really sorry that you feel so deeply offended Sam, but derailing a topic with complaints about another poster, isn't appropriate here. We have clear procedures which need to be followed at such times - and I'd therefore be grateful if you would check numbers 5 to 7 and number 12 in our Code of Conduct - which everyone agrees to at registration.

    .

    Many thanks to everyone for their contributions.


Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Los Angeles Mexico City London Colombo Kuala Lumpur Sydney
Sun, 5:09 AM Sun, 7:09 AM Sun, 1:09 PM Sun, 5:39 PM Sun, 8:09 PM Sun, 10:09 PM