Someone Buddhify me

[Poppy Hatonn]

Walikuwa na Buddhist Summit, mwaka Jana au mwaka juzi,sikumbuki wapi,labda Japan au Thailand. Wanasema,"There is a Buddhist presence in Africa. We don't how it got there. But we should focus our attention on Africa. "

 

[February Makamba]

I used to be.

Why you left where I'm headed?

 

[February Makamba]

When you say " I " you mean the body,the feelings,the perceptions,formation predispositions(your habitual thoughts), and consciousness.

Those seem to be vastly different things, the body is quite different from the feelings and thoughts...but I, feels to be a one thing.
How can one thing actually be all those things?

 

[February Makamba]

U used to be Buddhist?? Hawa wanaoabudu vitu vya ajabu na masanamu??

Sent using Jamii Forums mobile app

You are very misinformed. Buddhist hawaabudu sanamu.
Maybe unawachanganya na wahindu

 

[Poppy Hatonn]

Here is some Buddha chat
At the Gotamaka Shrine On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at the Gotamaka Shrine, near Vesālī. There the Blessed One addressed the monks thus: “On the basis of direct knowledge I teach the Dhamma, O monks, not without direct knowledge. On good grounds I teach the Dhamma, not without good grounds. Convincingly I teach the Dhamma, not unconvincingly. Therefore, monks, my advice should be followed and my instruction accepted. This, monks, is sufficient for your satisfaction, sufficient for your gladness, sufficient for your joy: fully enlightened is the Blessed One; well proclaimed is the Blessed One’s Dhamma; well conducted is the Sangha.” Thus spoke the Blessed One. Gladdened, those monks approved the Blessed One’s words. While this discourse was being spoken, the thousandfold world system shook.
Now,this is a quotation from The Buddha. We could write such a one like this every day till the end of the year in some kind of Buddha thought for the day column.

 

[February Makamba]

Here is some Buddha chat
At the Gotamaka Shrine On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at the Gotamaka Shrine, near Vesālī. There the Blessed One addressed the monks thus: “On the basis of direct knowledge I teach the Dhamma, O monks, not without direct knowledge. On good grounds I teach the Dhamma, not without good grounds. Convincingly I teach the Dhamma, not unconvincingly. Therefore, monks, my advice should be followed and my instruction accepted. This, monks, is sufficient for your satisfaction, sufficient for your gladness, sufficient for your joy: fully enlightened is the Blessed One; well proclaimed is the Blessed One’s Dhamma; well conducted is the Sangha.” Thus spoke the Blessed One. Gladdened, those monks approved the Blessed One’s words. While this discourse was being spoken, the thousandfold world system shook.
Now,this is a quotation from The Buddha. We could write such a one like this every day till the end of the year in some kind of Buddha thought for the day column.

I second this

 

[Candlestick]

Kama unapata muda unaweza tembelea temple yao kwa Dar ipo Muhimbili. Me huwa naenda kwa ajili ya Meditation kila jumapili.

Mkuu kuna vigezo au utaratibu wowote wa kuingia kwenye hiyo temple? Nameditate nahitaji sehem ya kujumuika

 

[Uhakika Bro]

Nimeipenda exchange yako February Makamba na Kiranga

It shows Kiranga is a typical personification of how to really reject sth.
You reject each and everything totally, aani in toto. Ni kama wamarekani weusi na wajamaika anakuambia 'There is no, nothing' 'You cant tell me nothing' aani unakataa hadi cha mwisho.

Anayeogopa kufa na kutamani aendelee kuishi ni yule ambaye at least amekubali kuwa yupo na anaishi. Lakini asiye na wazo hilo hana maumivu yoyote na kufa. He never was there anyway. Na ndivyo itakavyohitimishwa baadaye, mwisho wake ni kuwa kama vile hukuwahi kuwepo kweli (kufa).
It is simply a choice one makes. And each choice is perfect for the one making it. He enjoys it fully! God allows that because he really loves YOU. So He allows you to partake the best thing specifically assigned so by YOU. Be it Life or Death.

And to February, the river course and liver water example was on point. A person is that which is a constantly changing constant. For life itself is dynamic, and needs do change but there is something that is always there, taking different forms and characters but it is the same 'it'. Like some form of a personality.

A man will say, I think therefore I am
While God just says, I AM THAT I AM. The whole 'thing' is just IS!!. So Mr. Kiranga, you may call this an illusion. Okay, but heey.... therefore this illusion is all there is. Rejecting 'it', is rejecting reality itself.

And when you decide to reject the whole reality, in order to find 'the alternative to reality' which has to be another reality.... I am lost... I mean what is it that you are doing again🤨🤨!!?

Sir, rejecting reality is entertaining non reality. If reality is existance and the life- experience we have therefore so non-reality is simply death. Not this, temporaly rest tu, a aah. Death in the full sense of the word on the side of the one dying. You can't even say 'the one experiencing death'. No. It doesn't work that way.

 

[Kiranga]

Why you left where I'm headed?

I am ahead of you by at least 20 years.

 

[Candlestick]

Rev Pannasekara ndiye Monk Mkaazi,Resident Monk. Lakini anakuwa na safari nyingi za kwenda Masasi.0757 713 137.
No. yangu mimi ni 0652 079 561.

Monk wa sehemu gan mkuu

 

[Kiranga]

Nimeipenda exchange yako February Makamba na Kiranga

It shows Kiranga is a typical personification of how to really reject sth.
You reject each and everything totally, aani in toto. Ni kama wamarekani weusi na wajamaika anakuambia 'There is no, nothing' 'You cant tell me nothing' aani unakataa hadi cha mwisho.

Anayeogopa kufa na kutamani aendelee kuishi ni yule ambaye at least amekubali kuwa yupo na anaishi. Lakini asiye na wazo hilo hana maumivu yoyote na kufa. He never was there anyway. Na ndivyo itakavyohitimishwa baadaye, mwisho wake ni kuwa kama vile hukuwahi kuwepo kweli (kufa).
It is simply a choice one makes. And each choice is perfect for the one making it. He enjoys it fully! God allows that because he really loves YOU. So He allows you to partake the best thing specifically assigned so by YOU. Be it Life or Death.

And to February, the river course and liver water example was on point. A person is that which is a constantly changing constant. For life itself is dynamic, and needs do change but there is something that is always there, taking different forms and characters but it is the same 'it'. Like some form of a personality.

A man will say, I think therefore I am
While God just says, I AM THAT I AM. The whole 'thing' is just IS!!. So Mr. Kiranga, you may call this an illusion. Okay, but heey.... therefore this illusion is all there is. Rejecting 'it', is rejecting reality itself.

And when you decide to reject the whole reality, in order to find 'the alternative to reality' which has to be another reality.... I am lost... I mean what is it that you are doing again[emoji2955][emoji2955]!!?

Sir, rejecting reality is entertaining non reality. If reality is existance and the life- experience we have therefore so non-reality is simply death. Not this, temporaly rest tu, a aah. Death in the full sense of the word on the side of the one dying. You can't even say 'the one experiencing death'. No. It doesn't work that way.

Mkuu,

First things first, there is no nothing.

It is just a representation of an unreal abstract concept.

And even that abstract concept is not nothing.

It is an abstract concept of nothing.

Nothing does not exist.

And if it would exist, it wouldn't be nothing.

It would be the existence of nothing.

The existence of nothing is not nothing.

It is the existence of nothing.

The non existence of nothing is not nothing.

It is the non existence of nothing.

So, there is no nothing.

 

[Kiranga]

Monk wa sehemu gan mkuu

Buddhist Temple, Upanga, Dar es salaam.

Kona ya mtaa wa Mindu na Malik.

Plot number 606 kama sijakosea.

 

[Uhakika Bro]

Mkuu,

First things first, there is no nothing.

It is just a representation by an abstract concept.

And even that abstract concept is not nothing.

It is an abstract concept of nothing.

Nothing does not exist.

And if it would exist, it wouldn't be nothing.

It would be the existence of nothing.

The existence if nothing is not nothing.

It is tye existence of nothing.

The non existence of nothing is not nothing.

It is the non existence if nothing.

So, there is no nothing.

Sent from my SM-S908U1 using JamiiForums mobile app

Sir, you have managed 🤣🤣🤣🤣

To present out a very confusing idea.

I am here wondering, how did you manage not to confuse yourself along the way.

Anyway that was the first, you can proceed.

 

[Poppy Hatonn]

Since it was seconded,we should have a second quote.

Three Types of Patients There are, O monks, three types of patients found in the world. What three?

There is one patient: whether or not he obtains proper nourishment, proper medicine, and adequate nursing, he will not recover from his illness.

There is another patient: whether or not he obtains all these things, he will recover from his illness.

There is still another patient who will recover from his illness only if he receives proper nourishment, proper medicine, and adequate nursing, but not if he lacks these. For him, O monks, a special diet, curative medicine, and good nursing are prescribed. But apart from him, also the other two types of patients should be attended to.24 These three types of patients are found in the world.

Similarly, monks, there are three other types of persons comparable to those three patients.

There is one type of person: whether or not he has the chance of seeing the Tathāgata and of listening to the Dhamma and Discipline proclaimed by him, he will not enter the path of assurance and will not reach perfection in wholesome states.25

There is another person: whether or not he has the chance of seeing the Tathāgata and of listening to the Dhamma and Discipline proclaimed by him, he will in any case enter upon the path of assurance and will reach perfection in wholesome states.

Again, there is one person who will enter upon the path of assurance and will reach perfection in wholesome states only if he has the chance of seeing the Tathāgata and of listening to the Dhamma and Discipline proclaimed by him, but not if he lacks this opportunity. It is for this person, O monks, that instruction in the Dhamma has been prescribed. But apart from him, the two others should also be instructed in the Dhamma.26 These are the three types of persons found in the world who are comparable to the three patients.

 

[February Makamba]

I am ahead of you by at least 20 years.

Why then did you leave buddhism?

 

[Kiranga]

Sir, you have managed [emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

To present out a very confusing idea.

I am here wondering, how did you manage not to confuse yourself along the way.

Anyway that was the first, you can proceed.

Second.

I have never rejected anything totally, to my recollection.

If you notice, even this statement is qualified.

I mostly use frameworks, definitions, contexts to bring perspective and a sense of intelligent humility in even my strongest assertions.

That is why I don't simply say, for example "God does not exist". At least not in the initial defining instance of any thread.

Rather, I define, I give a framework/context, and then I make my assertion.

Example.

The all knowing, all capable and all loving God (definition) in a logically consistent world (framework) cannot exist due to internal contradictions such as exemplified by the Epicurean Paradox (assertion, reason for assertion and example)

Godel's Incompleteness Theorems forbid total acceptance or total rejection without frameworks, proper definitions and contexts.

So, if you have an example of an unqualified rejection or acceptance from my side, please bring it here as an example for further examination.

 

[Kiranga]

Why then did you leave buddhism?

I was attracted to Buddhism by its more philosophical nature, more peaceful outlook and my intrigue with meditation.

I learned a lot of useful things, the eightfold noble path, the four noble truths, the Dhammapada, the Tripitaka, I learned from enriching my cultural intelligence to history of King Asoka and The Buddha himself.

But eventually I realized that Buddhism is just another religion/ philosophy, a narrative -beautiful natrative- but very human.

Ultimately it rested on a lot of unproven and unprovable mysticism that has no scientific base that I found to be incredible not only empirically, but also logically.

As a person who prize logical consistency, I could not accept Buddhism as a true religion or a logically consistent philosophy.

That does not mean I do not draw a lot of useful lessons and inspirations from Buddhism, such as staying with loving-kindness in a reasonably balanced way in a world that is full of hate, walki g the middle way, believing in being able to awaken my inner power (Buddha nature) and gaining my own emancipation and enlightenment from ignorance.

It was the most fun and most useful religion I have ever came across.

I truly advise you to at least read the main texts and familiarize with the major concepts.

That will at least give you another very different perspective from the usual Judeo-Christian/ Islamic worldview most of our people are familiar with.

 

[Poppy Hatonn]

Second.

I have never rejected anything totally, to my recollection.

If you notice, even this statement is qualified.

I mostly use frameworks, definitions, contexts to bring perspective and a sense of intelligent humility in even my strongest assertions.

That is why I don't simply say, for example "God does not exist". At keast not in the initial defining instance of any thread.

Rather, I define, I give a framework/context, and then I make my assertion.

Example.

The all knowing, all capable and all loving God (definition) in a logically consistent world (framework) cannot exist due to internal contradictions such as exemplified by the Epicurean Paradox (assertion and reason for assertion and example)

Godel's Incompleteness Theorems forbid total acceptance or total rejection without frameworks, proper definitions and contexts.

So, if you have an example of an unqualified rejection or acceptance from my side, please bring it here as an example for further examination.

You are a Middle Way philosopher,just like Nagarjuna. I can assure you,you will have no trouble understanding the Buddhist doctrine . But this abtruse metaphysical teaching much much later. At the beginning the Buddha taught in very simple language

 

[Kiranga]

You are a Middle Way philosopher,just like Nagarjuna. I can assure you,you will have no trouble understanding the Buddhist doctrine . But this abtruse metaphysical teaching much much later. At the beginning the Buddha taught in very simple language

Poppy Hatonn tumekutana Buddhist Temple mara kadhaa nakumbuka Rev. Pannasekara alikuwa anataka kutafsiri Dhammapada kwenda kwenye Kiswahili akatupa hiyo kazi mimi na wewe.

Rev. Pannasekara introduced me to you. Ila mimi ndiyo nilikuwa naondoka kuja Marekani kusoma muda huo.

Sijasoma Buddhism kwa muda, lakini nimepata mengi ambayo bado ninayo kutoka Buddhism na nafikiri pengine bila hata kujua consciously, nayatumia.

Sijui hata ile project ya kutafsiri Dhammapada kwenda Kiswahili ilishaje?

 

[February Makamba]

But eventually I realized that Buddhism is just another religion/ philosophy, a narrative -beautiful natrative- but very human.

Ultimately it rested on a lot of unproven and unprovable mysticism that has no scientific base that I found to be incredible not only empirically, but also logically.

Sorry, I'm kind of a newbee. I do but have a couple of questions;

What's unscientific about the core doctrine of Buddhism? That is, the four noble truths.

Because from what I hear,🤫 word in the temple's corridors, is that they are all pretty scientific