SOMEONE RESPONDED TO THIS VIDEO PLEASE WATCH IT IF YOU CAN kzitem.infoF107M6SjcSM
@TadaGenji
25 күн бұрын
Antony, we discussed this at length. No-Self doesn't negate the existence of a relative self nor does it apply to the Buddha Nature. It is meant to be used as a methodology that helps you break down and investigate the interdependent causes of phenomena. You keep pushing this idea that it doesn't make sense, but it isn't making sense because you are misunderstanding/misusing the teaching. Buddhism doesn't teach Nihilism nor Annihilationism, so there is no teaching of non-continuum. Your entire concern/confusion regarding same makes no sense because Buddhism isn't teaching that. Anyone telling you Buddhism teaches Annihilation is, simply put, wrong. I'm not sure where you are getting your info, but it really sounds like you are either getting it from frauds or you are simply misunderstanding the concepts.
@FedericoAndino
25 күн бұрын
That is a great answer! Yes, this is correct.
@leonpeters-malone3054
24 күн бұрын
What you've said reinforces that feeling that the question has been misunderstood. I certainly couldn't quote the sutras, it's been too long since I've read a koan. At the same time I feel that this question is an out of context issue. If you're asking it, then you've missed the point, not understood the lesson. I will claim no expertise, no ability to read the sutras in any language other than English as well. So if I have things wrong, please tell me. Just like what I said in my comment.
@ninjaspy7199
16 күн бұрын
Antony i recommened you find a school that encorporates Debate like The Gelug. I also recommend you find a Geshe who you have a good connection with who can properly give you guidance on your path.
@mortenh9519
25 күн бұрын
This is what I struggle with in Buddhism. Inspired by Zen, I have practiced meditation, in different forms, for over 15 years, following Japanese and Tibetan teachings. Meditation is an integral life practice for me. But you cannot both be nothing and be reincarnated. This is completely nonsensical. It is an unfounded BELIEF, that does not stand on its own two legs. However, I would direct you to the writings of Stephen Batchelor. He has looked at the Pali Canon critically.
@AntonyCummins
25 күн бұрын
Thank you that’s gelpful
@MatthewMoller-gj1ht
25 күн бұрын
My question is regarding “I”. In Bruce Lee’s Enter The Dragon, he is talking with a monk and says “… because I does not exist…” . I have not delved into this but would like to get your input please. As always, thank you for your time and effort. MaHAlo!
@pubbliwebb
25 күн бұрын
In early Buddhism there was the Pudgalavada whose practitioners postulated some kind of entity that keeps reincarnating until enlightenment and nirvana. However, because the pudgala was very close to the atman of Hinduism they were heavily critiziced by the schools that eventually prevailed.
@AntonyCummins
23 күн бұрын
Thank you
@leonpeters-malone3054
24 күн бұрын
Zen perspective first, before a wider, less philosophy focused answer. Does it matter? Does it really matter at all? Does it matter at all? Does it mean anything to here and now? If you have a choice to either add to the pain in the world or do you prevent pain being added to the world? Do you take moments to learn how it is you think? Do you take moments to not make others wear the weaknesses, the faults, the flaws you have? Do you put your life and your expectations on others? Do you demand that others fit in your world? Or do you try the opposite? Accept the world as it is, work with people as they are now? The tree has fallen, it no longer matters if it has made a sound. I feel that your current read, question on the matter is based on a binary state of thinking that is warned against across wider texts and lessons. There is you and what you do, what are you and where you come from. There's what you bring in from your past and what you've done, what your karma is carrying. If this is the way I am now, then that is where I am. I am the total of many different things and perspectives. There's many I and Me. Some of them are more 'true' than others. Flaws, warts and all. If I remember the commentary, sutras, sources correctly, then there's most definitely a soul. For all the connotations that word brings, there's an 'infinite' soul and a 'finite' soul. The soul of you now is a momentary presentation of that larger 'infinite' entity. You'll have to forgive me for not being more specific. I can't place exactly where I read that. It feels far more Indian to Daoist on some level. There's a transience to everything ultimately. Once I started a road of Zen, I didn't look back. I am happy to be corrected by others. If I have elements confused, wrong, misunderstood, please reply and correct me. This road I've walked has been my own. It is my hope that the destination is still ahead of me, that the path I am takes me there in the time and way that best teaches me in the moment. This feels very much like the lesson has been misunderstood, the incorrect words and phrases chosen to pass on the lesson. There's an answer buried deep in the question, when you've learned to read it.
@odcat614
24 күн бұрын
First, the idea of a soul it's older then Christianity. Secondly, I find it funny that the English word for soul means something else than the Christian word...
@FedericoAndino
25 күн бұрын
Dear Anthony: first, let me tell you, I love your inquisitiveness. It is very refreshing! However, there's a series of mistakes and misconceptions on the concept of Anatman in Buddhism in your video. First, it is exceedingly difficult to speak of "Buddhism" as a monolithic thing. The Sautantrika understanding of Anatman and Cittasamtana is different than the Yogacaran one, for example. Same of Enlightenment; it is different from the Christian Soter. The main concept that defines what is Buddhist from what is not is The Four Seals. Can I ask where did you study Buddhism in an academic setting?
@AntonyCummins
25 күн бұрын
I point this out at the start. There is no one Buddhist way. Thank you for the kind response, it’s nice. But the question is of basic logic, I do not need academic study to ask a logical question. Does Buddhism have a soul. You can same x system does x system does not and so on.
@FedericoAndino
25 күн бұрын
@@AntonyCummins But you are not framing the question correctly, which makes me think that you didn't study this. Let me ask you: on which model of the cittasamtana (the process you're trying to describe) are basing your affirmations?
@TadaGenji
25 күн бұрын
@@AntonyCummins No-self doesn't negate the relative appearance of a relative self. Nor does it negate the Buddha Nature. However, the usage of "soul" is a poor choice because it comes with context that doesn't translate well into Buddhism... simply put, Buddhist define/conceive of the "mind" as something different than what Christians/Westerners conceive of as the "Soul". Any comparison is going to require explanation and context. Demanding it to fit without any explanation or context is reckless and dishonest.
@FedericoAndino
24 күн бұрын
It is a pity that you don't want to answer anymore. @TadaGeni is correct that the relative and ultimate are two ways that are not negated.
@ninjaspy7199
16 күн бұрын
it took 500 life cycles for buddha Shakyamuni to be a buddha.
@AntonyCummins
15 күн бұрын
Where is that from?
@ninjaspy7199
15 күн бұрын
@@AntonyCummins Long Answer: A monk in an Ancient Monastery in Rolwaling valley. Short Answer: The Jataka Tales
@Opozit1
25 күн бұрын
And who administers karma ? Something has to ! , and what was the 1st instance of cause and effect, these things require a supernatural bieng to start them. Something doesntccome out of nothing !.
@alpha4IV
25 күн бұрын
would you be cool with me doing a watch along of this vid on my stream? I love your channel and this video is along the topics I discuss on mine. What do you think a soul is in the Buddhist sense of Self, if the Self reincarnates & if the Self can reach Buddhahood?
@AntonyCummins
25 күн бұрын
Yes please do. Email me the link.
@KLINGONASSASSIN
25 күн бұрын
All religions are like bujinkan, doesn't mix well with logic.
@jackwolf3200
24 күн бұрын
I like your username. Qapla! ;-)
@ninjaspy7199
16 күн бұрын
Buddhism without Logic is not Buddhism Check out Nagarjuna's school of Logic
@-RONNIE
25 күн бұрын
Personally I think everybody has the right to believe in whatever they want. Also you cannot judge people on what they believe in as well.
@KLINGONASSASSIN
25 күн бұрын
But you always have to be free to criticise religion. Not the people, the religion.
@-RONNIE
25 күн бұрын
@@KLINGONASSASSIN true people are free to do whatever they please
Пікірлер: 30