Skip to main content
24 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 22, 2020 at 9:56 comment added ChrisW @SridharRatnakumar I appended to my answer, to try to answer your edit.
Jul 22, 2020 at 5:28 answer added Suminda Sirinath S. Dharmasena timeline score: 3
Jul 22, 2020 at 2:45 comment added user2512 the correct answer probably links to 'arupas' as well as 'detachment' etc
Jul 21, 2020 at 20:52 history edited Sridhar Ratnakumar CC BY-SA 4.0
added 62 characters in body
Jul 21, 2020 at 20:45 history edited Sridhar Ratnakumar CC BY-SA 4.0
clarification
Jul 21, 2020 at 20:43 comment added Sridhar Ratnakumar @ChrisW I've clarified by editing the question.
Jul 21, 2020 at 14:01 comment added ruben2020 @ChrisW Also reminds me of this - Was the Buddha harsh? and the Kesi Sutta.
Jul 21, 2020 at 12:08 comment added ChrisW If it were a serious question perhaps topics like this might be relevant -- What is a wrathful Buddha? -- Pretty tame, but then that's to be expected -- topics I'm not especially certain about by the way. But at first I didn't read it as a serious question, it seemed to be begging the question, "assuming facts not in evidence" -- or situational/topical e.g. referencing the case where Richard and Respondent argued about being 'enlightened'.
Jul 21, 2020 at 12:03 comment added ChrisW @ruben2020 Yes something like that might have been the Respondents view or doctrine in that dialog, also Richard talking about Gurus etc. I haven't read their full (10 email) dialog, but it seems to end with their arguing at cross purposes, with Richard putting words into the other's mouth. Another of Richard's arguments seems to be, that if any traditional religion were effective then the modern world wouldn't be in the state it's in now, with its wars and suicides. That was on the "Dissociation" page, I don't know why the OP rewrote that as explicitly "enlightened Buddhists" getting angry.
Jul 21, 2020 at 11:11 comment added ruben2020 @ChrisW Oh... OK. I think that applies more to Hinduism, where the Avatars can be warriors, and display anger and fight in battles like Rama or Krishna. It doesn't apply to Buddhas.
Jul 21, 2020 at 10:49 comment added ChrisW @ruben2020 IMO it's based on this quote from the author -- "as enlightened beings are demonstratively known to still have anger and anguish from time to time" -- in what appears to be some debate between 'Richard' and 'Respondent'. The topics of their argument isn't clear to me. :-) The meaning of the statement depends on what they refer to as "enlightened", Richard uses a non-Buddhist characterisation of what "enlightenment" is: "‘contracted ego’ (or ‘self’) has transmogrified into a fully expanded soul".
Jul 21, 2020 at 9:41 answer added Kumāra Bhikkhu timeline score: 3
Jul 21, 2020 at 0:13 answer added ChrisW timeline score: 2
Jul 20, 2020 at 23:37 comment added M H Could the question be improved if the mocking & pejorative naming used was modified to be nondisrespectful? But doing so might change an asker's intended meaning, if the question is intended to be pejorative. And, it's within an included quote. The guidelines seem unclear on that sort of tradeoff.
Jul 20, 2020 at 23:26 comment added M H Re the suggestion in the immediately above comment: Doing that would be very polite to that one somewhat anonymous writer & even help them distribute their antiBuddhist & antiAsian/racist material, yet at the same time would be very impolite & disservice to the more than 1 Billion Buddhists & 4 Billion Asians & Billions more Nonracists on the planet, as well as be against the instructions of , and disserving conscientious professionals in the mocked field. That is weighed and indicated, even if by inference & implication, when trying to help the asker with a good answer.
Jul 20, 2020 at 16:50 answer added ruben2020 timeline score: 3
Jul 20, 2020 at 13:42 comment added ChrisW I guess a way to answer this would be to read the two pages which the OP linked, i.e. On Disidentification and Dissociation, and, On Buddhism -- and start by quoting some of the author's own explanations of what Buddhism and Dissociation are -- and from that, explain whether you agree with the author's description of Buddhist doctrine and practice, and whether Buddhism matches the author's description of Dissociation.
Jul 20, 2020 at 3:30 answer added M H timeline score: 0
Jul 19, 2020 at 20:40 comment added ChrisW Also, welcome to the site. Is this meant to be an elementary "I hardly know anything about Buddhism, can you tell me something?" kind of introductory question, or is it meant to be a question which only an expert in psychology could answer? That's sometimes hard to know, when a new user asks a first question...
Jul 19, 2020 at 20:30 comment added ChrisW I doubt whether everyone has the same understanding of the word "dissociation" (I guess it's psychiatric/psychological jargon).Perhaps the current question boils down to, "Do you agree with how this Richard is using the word 'dissociation' to describe the goal of Buddhism?"
Jul 19, 2020 at 20:26 comment added ChrisW A different way to ask this question might be, quoting from the second reference -- "This reference explains vippayutta as "dissociation" -- is that a good translation, does it correspond well to the modern understanding of that word?"
Jul 19, 2020 at 20:17 comment added ChrisW I'm not sure I understand the last sentence. Is it saying, "It's a fact that enlightened Buddhists still get angry, how can you explain that fact except by referencing (i.e. by explaining that in terms of or as being a result of) psychological dissociation, what other possible explanation is there?"
Jul 19, 2020 at 19:35 review First posts
Jul 21, 2020 at 4:09
Jul 19, 2020 at 19:32 history asked Sridhar Ratnakumar CC BY-SA 4.0