New answers tagged

0

Any form of existence after parinirvana is "an inconceivable" in the Buddha's Dharma. This is equally true of Theravada as it is of Mahayana here. The Buddha, "after death," is inconceivable. The Buddha's mind, after death, is inconceivable. The Buddha's mind, before death, is also inconceivable. The Buddha questions Vesālī: “What do you ...


1

Both is the top of 31 planes of existence. People there have longest life, however they are arising and vanishing more than trillion times per second as well, and they are going to die as well. They are not going to reborn in hell immediately, however they can reborn in hell the death after that reborn. No where one can be hidden from death. Sutta Pitaka ...


0

What this question does is commit the logical fallacy of false equivalence, which is colloquially known as "comparing apples and oranges". The OP changed saṁsāra into "cyclic" and nirvāṇa into "non-cyclic", when these Sanskrit terms are never used in the mathematical or physical context of cycles or waves. Suppose I change ...


1

Well, Fourier Transform makes an assumption that the function of life is a smooth enough object. It must be at least continuous, and is a lot better if it is differentiable a couple of times or more. In case of none smooth points (like transitions taking place in case of death or birth for example), it makes a lot more sense to use some other bases, like ...


1

To our knowledge, Nāgārjuna never shared a precise formula for calculating the Fourier transform precisely, so we have no way of gauging his understanding of that particular equation. The remarkable thing about Fourier transforms is that a "local" phenomenon such as a singleton wave can be equivalently represented by the sum of infinite waves of ...


1

Nāgārjuna was not a mathematician; he was an eminent buddhist philosopher. That is certainly enough, don't you think? There is an interesting parallel here, perhaps — maybe even a useful analogy, though one that would only be meaningful to people who understand Fourier transforms — but that's all. The claim inside the question asked is mere puffery (great ...


Top 50 recent answers are included