* * *

Tipitaka Khmer

 Please feel welcome to join the transcription project of the Tipitaka translation in khmer, and share one of your favorite Sutta or more. Simply click here or visit the Forum: 

Search ATI on ZzE

Zugang zur Einsicht - Schriften aus der Theravada Tradition



Access to Insight / Zugang zur Einsicht: Dhamma-Suche auf mehr als 4000 Webseiten (deutsch / english) - ohne zu googeln, andere Ressourcen zu nehmen, weltliche Verpflichtungen einzugehen. Sie sind für den Zugang zur Einsicht herzlich eingeladen diese Möglichkeit zu nutzen. (Info)

Random Sutta
Random Article
Random Jataka

Zufälliges Sutta
Zufälliger Artikel
Zufälliges Jataka


Arbeits/Work Forum ZzE

"Dhammatalks.org":
[logo dhammatalks.org]
Random Talk
[pic 30]

Recent Topics

[Today at 03:07:17 PM]

[Today at 03:04:37 PM]

[Today at 02:56:41 PM]

[April 19, 2018, 12:55:21 PM]

[April 19, 2018, 04:48:12 AM]

[April 19, 2018, 01:19:35 AM]

[April 18, 2018, 12:27:55 PM]

[April 18, 2018, 12:26:00 PM]

[April 18, 2018, 12:18:31 PM]

[April 18, 2018, 06:06:52 AM]

[April 18, 2018, 01:13:09 AM]

[April 17, 2018, 04:41:05 PM]

[April 17, 2018, 03:54:39 PM]

[April 17, 2018, 03:23:52 PM]

[April 16, 2018, 06:18:51 PM]

[April 16, 2018, 12:47:32 AM]

[April 15, 2018, 12:28:06 PM]

[April 15, 2018, 09:39:03 AM]

[April 15, 2018, 12:35:32 AM]

[April 14, 2018, 04:18:33 AM]

[April 14, 2018, 02:12:07 AM]

[April 13, 2018, 07:31:39 PM]

[April 13, 2018, 06:17:55 PM]

[April 13, 2018, 05:31:59 AM]

[April 12, 2018, 06:15:00 AM]

[April 12, 2018, 02:58:27 AM]

[April 11, 2018, 02:57:48 PM]

[April 11, 2018, 12:04:07 PM]

[April 11, 2018, 02:54:59 AM]

[April 09, 2018, 06:00:29 PM]

[April 09, 2018, 05:42:37 PM]

[April 09, 2018, 11:16:14 AM]

[April 09, 2018, 09:24:34 AM]

[April 09, 2018, 02:48:32 AM]

[April 09, 2018, 02:29:31 AM]

[April 07, 2018, 05:19:05 PM]

[April 04, 2018, 03:08:45 PM]

[April 04, 2018, 10:55:42 AM]

[April 04, 2018, 05:40:16 AM]

[April 04, 2018, 04:56:37 AM]

[April 04, 2018, 02:40:07 AM]

[April 02, 2018, 01:22:37 PM]

[April 02, 2018, 11:55:40 AM]

[April 02, 2018, 07:18:56 AM]

[April 02, 2018, 06:49:19 AM]

[April 01, 2018, 08:41:01 AM]

[April 01, 2018, 06:06:15 AM]

[April 01, 2018, 04:33:03 AM]

[March 31, 2018, 06:13:31 PM]

[March 31, 2018, 05:43:45 AM]

Author Topic: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth  (Read 294 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Moritz

  • Cief houskeeper / Chefhausmeister
  • Very Engaged Member
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +214/-0
  • Gender: Male
Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« on: April 08, 2018, 09:17:45 PM »
Question forked from another topic :
Some would say that is safe to draw the conclusion that there is no afterlife at all based on the cientific knowledge accrued until now.
For those who is willing to put his faith/passion for this belief aside and make a honestly reevaluation about this issue looking for unbiased sources and more realiable methods to attest the validity of this hypothesis, will see that this belief is unlikely to be real. There is plenty of factors against and anyone could make a search to verify for oneself if interested.
This is an astonishing claim. Could you tell more about those "reliable methods to attest the validity of this hypothesis" (of rebirth) which would lead an intelligent person to the conclusion that "this belief is unlikely to be real"?

I would be pleased for any scientific or attempting to be scientific argument and evidence for or against the existence of an afterlife, a pre-life, continued rebirth, or something else in that regard to be discussed here.

As for canonical input here, I am reminded of the Pāyāsi Sutta , maybe the only reference in the suttas to trying to find out about the truth of the afterlife or existence or non-existence of a soul and of heavens or hells, etc. by something maybe vaguely resembling a materialist "scientific method".
I am sure material scientists have become much more sophisticated nowadays, but I do wonder, how can they have possibly derived methods to come to conclusions about how a living being experiences coming-into-existence and passing-out-of-an-existence, and by what measure they could count an afterlife following death, or a pre-life preceding birth, to be "likely" or "unlikely"?

_/\_

Offline Johann

  • Samanera
  • Very Engaged Member
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +338/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Date of ordination/Datum der Ordination.: 20140527
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2018, 03:01:04 AM »
In short, just the fact that scientific views chance and are refuted faster then a view has been taken on, makes it merely fascinating that people give even a penny for it.

As for the Dhamma, it's timeless and stands, as for the many kinds of views and their origin, look The Brahmā Net , where such as scientific views can be traced under annihilationist views at most and in "particular eternalism", in cases the sciences derives from theistic background.

It's worthy to mention, that especialy the materialist, eg. annihilationist view, is a grave wrong view, and leads to low and painful realms: see holocaust, killingfields... the common animal realm, if not capable to envision other states as possible outwardly reminded.
This post and Content has come to be by Dhamma-Dana and so is given as it       Dhamma-Dana: Johann

Offline Visitor

  • Prober
  • Regular Member / Normales Mitglied
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +1/-0
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #2 on: April 10, 2018, 11:07:20 AM »
I am sure material scientists have become much more sophisticated nowadays, but I do wonder, how can they have possibly derived methods to come to conclusions about how a living being experiences coming-into-existence and passing-out-of-an-existence, and by what measure they could count an afterlife following death, or a pre-life preceding birth, to be "likely" or "unlikely"?
Never underestimate the power of scientism.

Offline Johann

  • Samanera
  • Very Engaged Member
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +338/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Date of ordination/Datum der Ordination.: 20140527
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2018, 11:22:35 AM »
Let it be know when it has been found that all component phenomena are subject to decay. Surly it's hard to abound ones job as long some pay for it. Ask Nyom Moritz , being certified scientist. Not even an idea of how, not ask for why, old age sickness and death can be overcome, but a real drive to increase the cemeteries.

In that way, the "power" is clear seen by wise, and beloved by those of blind hope and believe.
This post and Content has come to be by Dhamma-Dana and so is given as it       Dhamma-Dana: Johann

Offline Moritz

  • Cief houskeeper / Chefhausmeister
  • Very Engaged Member
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +214/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #4 on: April 10, 2018, 07:20:12 PM »
In that way, the "power" is clear seen by wise, and beloved by those of blind hope and believe.

Bhante, scientism , not science.

Quote from:
Scientism is a term generally used to describe the facile application of science in unwarranted situations not amenable to application of the scientific method.

Or in other words: scientism is the tendency to apply "science" where there is no real foothold to apply materialist science methods.

And, as quite common, binocular is probably being ironic/sarcastic.

_/\_

Offline Johann

  • Samanera
  • Very Engaged Member
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +338/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Date of ordination/Datum der Ordination.: 20140527
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #5 on: April 11, 2018, 02:46:08 AM »
E.g. Philosophy. Does it has the objective of liberation? What ever mod of entertaining (upadana) and grasp of views and philosophy might give joy in wandering on, Moritz and Sadhu for given info, details for possible misunderstandig and Zuvorkommenheit.

And sure, the pontential of Upasika Binoclar is not to underestimate, yet how to bring it, into best direction.

(Would one "Anderen eine Falle stellen" one would "selbst hineinfallen" says a proverb, and counts here Dhamma, in saying "nothing to fear in regard of good intentions, if there is firm trust in Kamma and its heir)
« Last Edit: April 11, 2018, 02:53:11 AM by Johann »
This post and Content has come to be by Dhamma-Dana and so is given as it       Dhamma-Dana: Johann

Offline Danilo

  • Aramika
  • Regular Member / Normales Mitglied
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +13/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2018, 03:49:48 AM »
Hi Moritz,

The fellow who asserted that "there is no life after death", which I was referring to, is the physicist Sean Carroll . His claim is supported by the assumptions:

1. The mind is the brain
2. The brain is made of atoms
3. We know enough about how atoms work
4. The atoms work in such way that leaves no room for their arrangement and information persist after death

For full disclosure, here follows the video of his speech (the argument starts at 7:02)

Regarding the doctrine of rebirth be unlikely to be real, it's a personal opinion based on the Occam's razor principle: Whenever facing a problem without conclusion, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is always more likely to be the correct answer.

So, in short:

From one side, we have ancient scriptures claiming that post-mortem rebirth, realms, divine beings, hellish beings and supernatural powers are part of the natural world.

From the other side, we found ourselves here in the contemporary world, equipped with high technology and building up more and more knowledge about the natural world as the time goes on. Humanity has attained a level of knowledge that would be inconceivable for anyone in the ancient world and yet no sign of rebirth, realms or devas was found.

Now, what is the hypothetical answer that would be more likely to be the truth for this problem? > That this things are myths, legends which emerged from beliefs of the ancient world.

Also another thing to mention that might be relevant for this matter One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge :

The One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge was an offer by the James Randi Educational Foundation (JREF) to pay out one million U.S. dollars to anyone who can demonstrate a supernatural or paranormal ability under agreed-upon scientific testing criteria. A version of the challenge was first issued in 1964. Over a thousand people applied to take it, but none were successful. The challenge was terminated in 2015.

Supernatural powers are somehow related to rebirth since according to the cannon, Buddha have come to know the existence of rebirth, realms and its inhabitants through supernatural powers.

May this post not end up be a hindrance for the readers.   :-|

Offline Johann

  • Samanera
  • Very Engaged Member
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +338/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Date of ordination/Datum der Ordination.: 20140527
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #7 on: April 12, 2018, 06:54:03 AM »
(Going short between in this "enjoyment topic": if not wishing others that it might be a hindrence to long therm good, Njom Danilo, it might be good to tell that this materialistic view is what the Buddha called annihilationist views , most destructive, since it denies kammic effects on a larger scale.

Therefore this view is regarded as "evil views with fixed destiny' (niyata-micchāditthi)" , which is also one of the sick reasons which block off any spiritual (long therm good) attainment in the present existence (Abhithanani , six major wrongdoings), a circumstances the most, especially "modern" people actually face. So generally not "happy or approving certain enjoyment and play with it. It's like small dogs play biting, done for the sake of later big harm, getting used to it: playing.

The "spoilsport"

Suggesting to take on better hobbies for conductive joy , e.g. the 10 way of merits . E.g. again: good work & concentration  :)

More "undisturbed" playing might be proper if moved to the kitchen is wished)
This post and Content has come to be by Dhamma-Dana and so is given as it       Dhamma-Dana: Johann

Offline Moritz

  • Cief houskeeper / Chefhausmeister
  • Very Engaged Member
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +214/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #8 on: April 12, 2018, 08:48:32 AM »
Hello Danilo,
Vandami, Bhante, _/\_

thanks for getting back. I'm at the moment a bit cut short on my time. But I find this an interesting topic.

The fellow who asserted that "there is no life after death", which I was referring to, is the physicist Sean Carroll . His claim is supported by the assumptions:

1. The mind is the brain
2. The brain is made of atoms
3. We know enough about how atoms work
4. The atoms work in such way that leaves no room for their arrangement and information persist after death

The first assumption is a very strong assumption and everything else rests on this.
The assumption also does not make very much sense to me. I will try to explain this at the end.

Regarding the doctrine of rebirth be unlikely to be real, it's a personal opinion based on the Occam's razor principle: Whenever facing a problem without conclusion, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is always more likely to be the correct answer.
I think, Occam's razor is a very natural way of thinking. Everyone would always try to find the simplest (for them) explanation for whatever they observe. But counting the number of assumptions is not at all simple, or unequivocal, especially with such a philosophical problem, concerning the very basis of one's own experienced existence.

From one side, we have ancient scriptures claiming that post-mortem rebirth, realms, divine beings, hellish beings and supernatural powers are part of the natural world.

From the other side, we found ourselves here in the contemporary world, equipped with high technology and building up more and more knowledge about the natural world as the time goes on. Humanity has attained a level of knowledge that would be inconceivable for anyone in the ancient world and yet no sign of rebirth, realms or devas was found.
How do you know that the level of knowledge of "humanity" (obviously, the levels and areas of knowledge vary greatly among members of humanity) would be inconceivable for anyone in the ancient world? Do you know the minds of all the people in the ancient world and what they knew and what they saw? There are already a lot of assumptions here. But maybe they are acceptable if they are mainly about materialist science kinds of knowledge.
But is it not, in the other direction, possible, that they had different areas of knowledge that now for us are very difficult to know about or even unconceivable?

I think the assumption that "our" public, scientific, mathematical and clearly defined knowledge about things in the material world is the only kind of knowledge, and superior to everything that has ever been known by anyone before, is one of the strongest of all the underlying assumptions here.

And how do you know that "no sign of rebirth, realms or devas was found"? By whom? By you? By everyone? By "humanity"?
Obviously, you are making a lot of assumptions, many of which you do not even consider.

Is knowledge individual or is knowledge public, shared by everyone, common to everyone?
Is your own conscious experience individual and only seen by you, or is it open to be seen by everyone?
Do you see what is in my mind? Do you see what I see? Do you know what I know?


Now, what is the hypothetical answer that would be more likely to be the truth for this problem? > That this things are myths, legends which emerged from beliefs of the ancient world.
How many assumptions for answer A, how many assumptions for answer B? Can you actually count them to know which one would be more valid by Occam's razor?



When I was starting to think about my own existence I was thinking a lot about knowledge and how I can actually know something. At first, it seems that one could divide knowledge into two areas: 1. knowledge about things in the external world, shared with others, that one can describe, define and talk about with definite clarity. 2. knowledge about one's own inner experience.
The first kind of knowledge can be shared and communicated and understood by language (which is already a quite miraculous thing). But it seems that the first kind of knowledge is actually based on the second. Only through the second, the direct knowledge of one's own experience, can the other kind of knowledge about things in the "external world" actually exist. What we directly know is first of all our own direct experience. And only in this experience then come "other beings" into play, as part of the "external world", with which we can communicate. And then we need a language, based on external signs, which we must find agreement on, and on such conventions we can build up and derive by logic a lot of knowledge about external things, that we all share, that all agree with our individual personal experience as far as we can observe.
And it even becomes so abstract that we can then share what we have seen and heard and learnt from here and there and tell others about it, and hear about what others have to say about what they have experienced elsewhere, in a way that they can describe in our common shared and defined language, and exchange and transfer "knowledge" in that way.
But this kind of knowledge only pertains to things that we can definitely describe by the language defined by these exterior signs that we agreed upon somehow. But many things are missing from it, and such as qualia are not really what we can share among each other, for example. We cannot share our feelings and perceptions directly.
So there is more to know than possible to describe.

Scientific knowledge is all about what can be definitely described in a formalized language. But our conscious experience is more complex than that.

Sometimes we can still talk about things of our own experience and understand each other. By making assumptions about this or that part of experience as being also shared by others or similar and comparable. So there we have also come up with common understood words in our language, to describe various feelings and perceptions and so on. But still, the full extent of what a person knows and has seen by own experience can not be put into language and shared publically with everyone. Every living being seems to have their private knowledge on the most fundamental level that can not be exchanged.

Sometimes we learn things from others, only through words. They describe to us what they have seen by themselves or heard and learnt from elsewhere and we interpret what they say and learn something intellectually in that way. But we do not have the direct experience that first came to this knowledge. Maybe we can retrace it in our own minds and our own understanding of things that we already know for ourselves, and the language is then only a tool to put these things together.
But sometimes we cannot verify what we have been told by others through our own knowledge of things that we can see by ourselves or already know and only need to put them together in the right way. So in that case we can simply believe what others say, but there is still doubt about it, because we could not yet verify.

Scientific knowledge has to always be constructed in a way hat it can be reproduced and verified by very clearly defined means which can be measured externally. And all the language about these kinds of knowledge has to be very carefully constructed and unambiguous as well, so that the knowledge can be transferred easily without error.
But actually there is no knowledge at all directly transferred. But only the means of arriving at that knowledge, for someone who is able to interpret the well-defined language correctly and carry out the "experiment" by himself.

So it is astounding that we have developed such well working means of "transferring" knowledge. But this kind of knowledge is limited by what can be pointed at externally. And ultimately we do not verify most of what we hear and "learn". We only believe. Most of all our "public" scientific knowledge is for most people only belief. They do not all carry out the experiment and verify or do the complicated calculation.

All we have "perfected" (maybe) is a method of reproducing certain types of knowledge regarding the material external reality. But still most of our everyday communications mostly simply transfers "belief" and we take that "belief" or what we have heard at face value.
Quote
"But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth."

"If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth.

I will end now with an explanation why I think the assumption that "the mind is the brain" makes not much sense, which touches also on being "scientific" a bit, but also shows how this kind of knowledge is limited on principle because some things pertaining experience are simply not "factory"-reproducible.
So this is just based on something "what I have heard" (just as all the suttas, and also like what most of people nowadays believe they "know", because "it's science", although they have never verified directly). So this is just anecdotal evidence based on a story (or several) I have heard, about "near-death-experiences" and "out-of-body-experiences" by patients in hospitals, mostly on the brink of death and in critical condition, being operated on. (But actually my belief is not based on these stories but on what I myself have experienced earlier.) I am sure you must have heard similar things, of people telling to the surgeon after the operation how they could remember seeing their own body from a position floating above. And sometimes even pointing out certain details of things in the room that could only be seen from the ceiling, or some things like that. And these things could be verified by others, without any "scientific" explanation of how the patient who was in some kind of coma or something could have seen that from their position. But of course, since this is all only "anecdotal evidence" and not really possible to reproduce in a reliable way, there is no accepted "scientific knowledge" about this.

Now all our hubris about "scientific knowledge" and "verifiable by experiment" etc. has led us to turn some things upside down. When we come back to the "two areas of knowledge": that of direct experience, direct knowledge, and that of "knowledge of things in the exterior world based on definitive descriptions in clear communicable language". The direct experience and knowledge is the basis for the other one, and not the other way around. Only through own experience do we actually come to all this clear descriptive knowledge that we have nowadays through "science". But because our own experience is more encompassing than the set things we can describe by definitive language, we exclude a lot of our own experience from what is "knowable" officially. Now we even want to go so far and say that our own conscious experience is actually just identified by a material object (the brain). That is turning things upside down and therefore makes no sense to me.

Regarding "supernatural" claims about after-life and devas and spirits and so on I think it is good to "safeguard the truth" (i.e. know how to distinguish knowledge from belief, and to know about one's own reasons for what to believe, and whom to believe, without jumping too early to the conclusion that "Only this is true; anything else is worthless"), before possibly one time "awakening to the truth", as is described in the Canki Sutta .

_/\_

May this post not end up be a hindrance for the readers.   :-|
*  Lot of time spent "philosophizing" instead of doing my work again, which is, I think not the right hobby . So now I will be off again at least for a few days (I hope! If I can restrain myself). But this is really a difficult to break addiction, yet quite enjoyable. ^-^   May the gods have mercy on us!  :)

Offline Danilo

  • Aramika
  • Regular Member / Normales Mitglied
  • *
  • Sadhu! or +13/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: Scientific evidence against or for rebirth
« Reply #9 on: April 15, 2018, 12:35:32 AM »
Moritz, my assumptions are all hypothesis, they are not a ultimatum. But all assumptions that I've made in the previous post is based on the apparent fact that reality usually reveals itself as much simpler than we would like it to be. If supernatural elements were included in the hypothesys, it would lead to more problems and more assumptions and these assumptions may lead again to more problems and so on.


When I was starting to think about my own existence I was thinking a lot about knowledge and how I can actually know something. At first, it seems that one could divide knowledge into two areas: 1. knowledge about things in the external world, shared with others, that one can describe, define and talk about with definite clarity. 2. knowledge about one's own inner experience.
The first kind of knowledge can be shared and communicated and understood by language (which is already a quite miraculous thing). But it seems that the first kind of knowledge is actually based on the second. Only through the second, the direct knowledge of one's own experience, can the other kind of knowledge about things in the "external world" actually exist. What we directly know is first of all our own direct experience. And only in this experience then come "other beings" into play, as part of the "external world", with which we can communicate. And then we need a language, based on external signs, which we must find agreement on, and on such conventions we can build up and derive by logic a lot of knowledge about external things, that we all share, that all agree with our individual personal experience as far as we can observe.
And it even becomes so abstract that we can then share what we have seen and heard and learnt from here and there and tell others about it, and hear about what others have to say about what they have experienced elsewhere, in a way that they can describe in our common shared and defined language, and exchange and transfer "knowledge" in that way.
But this kind of knowledge only pertains to things that we can definitely describe by the language defined by these exterior signs that we agreed upon somehow. But many things are missing from it, and such as qualia are not really what we can share among each other, for example. We cannot share our feelings and perceptions directly.
So there is more to know than possible to describe.

All this also means that it might exist a gap between what we thing the Buddha have experienced through reading the suttas and what in fact, he actually have experienced.

Regarding "supernatural" claims about after-life and devas and spirits and so on I think it is good to "safeguard the truth" (i.e. know how to distinguish knowledge from belief, and to know about one's own reasons for what to believe, and whom to believe, without jumping too early to the conclusion that "Only this is true; anything else is worthless"), before possibly one time "awakening to the truth", as is described in the Canki Sutta .

I agree  _/\_

Tags:
 
22 Guests, 0 Users
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 20, 2018, 08:38:25 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Talkbox

 

Danilo

April 15, 2018, 12:43:25 AM
Bhante _/\_
 

Johann

April 15, 2018, 12:38:56 AM
Nyom Danilo.
 

Johann

April 12, 2018, 10:05:15 AM
Moritz
 

Moritz

April 12, 2018, 08:34:11 AM
Namasakara, Bhante. _/\_
 

Moritz

April 10, 2018, 07:19:18 PM
Hello.
 

Johann

April 10, 2018, 01:09:20 PM
Nyom. (Sideboad ist stets zugeklappt... tech. Probl.) 3:00 ist auch schon guten Tag.
 

Moritz

April 10, 2018, 03:06:49 AM
Good day (night here)
_/\_
 

Moritz

April 10, 2018, 02:54:42 AM
Namasakara, Bhante. _/\_
 

Johann

April 09, 2018, 09:43:17 AM
Take your time Nyom Danilo and watch the breath to stay best calm for best benefit. A lot of chances to get ride of many ols burdens.
 

Danilo

April 08, 2018, 06:24:57 PM
_/\_
 

Johann

April 08, 2018, 05:54:03 PM
Nyom Danilo.
 

Marcel

April 08, 2018, 09:58:59 AM
sadhu!
 

Johann

April 08, 2018, 07:35:17 AM
Sadhu!
 

Moritz

April 08, 2018, 06:13:54 AM
Good Uposatha to all. _/\_
 

Marcel

April 01, 2018, 06:17:08 AM
 :-* :-* :-*
 

Johann

March 31, 2018, 07:13:47 PM
Nyom Jens.
 

Johann

March 31, 2018, 10:11:20 AM
Sadhu!
 

Marcel

March 31, 2018, 09:52:03 AM
 :-* ich wünsche allen ein verdienstvollen uposatha  :-*
 

Johann

March 27, 2018, 06:44:11 PM
Atma zieht sich hier nun zurück. Möge sich Vollkommenheit einstellen.
 

Johann

March 27, 2018, 05:26:44 PM
Nyom Binocular.
 

Johann

March 27, 2018, 04:10:58 PM
Nyom Jens.
 

Johann

March 27, 2018, 01:47:58 PM
Brahmane Hanspeter.
 

Johann

March 27, 2018, 01:41:50 PM
Moritz, mag sich Vollendung ergeben. (Chamreun bo)
 

Moritz

March 27, 2018, 12:20:53 PM
Chom reap sour. _/\_
 

Moritz

March 27, 2018, 12:11:33 PM
Vandami, Bhante _/\_
 

Johann

March 26, 2018, 01:42:45 PM
Nyom Binocular.

my person will leave for today and rests. There have been left some hard challenges (sure for many). May they be releasing taken and increase conviction.
 

Johann

March 25, 2018, 01:40:14 PM
Gute Antwort. Sadhu!
 

Marcel

March 25, 2018, 12:46:12 PM
 :-* :-* :-*

beste wünsche zurück an erhwürdigen bhante! es ist unsicher wann ich wieder komme! upanissayapaccayena!  :-* :-* :-*
 

Johann

March 25, 2018, 12:28:38 PM
Marcel.
(Heute im Nordkloster, best wünsche vom Abt dort, er fragt stets "Wann kommt er? Ich muß immer an ihn denken."
 

Johann

March 24, 2018, 10:44:34 AM
Sadhu!
 

Marcel

March 24, 2018, 09:52:48 AM
 :-* heute ist uposatha!! ich wünsche allen ein verdienstvollen tag! mögen die devas jene bescheid geben, die kein zugang haben! :-*
 

Johann

March 23, 2018, 11:37:46 AM
Sadhu! Zu was immer einer Zuflucht nimmt, sich hingibt, daran erfreut, das wird/ist sein Schutz, für Bindung oder Ungebundenheit.
 

Marcel

March 23, 2018, 01:43:01 AM
 :-* möge die drei juwelen den ehrwürdigen bhante beschützen und ihn auf seinem weg unterstützen :-*
 

Johann

March 23, 2018, 01:28:02 AM
Kampf der Devas mit den Asuras um den Berg. :)
 

Johann

March 23, 2018, 01:26:30 AM
Regenzeit... außen trüb und unangenehm, nagend, faulend, doch dahinter ist alles fein.
 

Marcel

March 23, 2018, 01:10:47 AM
 :-* ehrwürdiger bhante johann, ja soweit alles gut! und wie geht es ihnen?  :-*
 

Johann

March 23, 2018, 12:58:05 AM
verlesen... Marcel :) alles gut im (ver)laufen?
 

Johann

March 23, 2018, 12:26:23 AM
Moritz
 

Administration

March 21, 2018, 03:42:55 PM
Sadhu!
 

Marcel

March 21, 2018, 03:32:47 PM
 :-* mögen sie alle noch in diesem leben das herz von avijja befreien!!! :-*
 

Johann

March 19, 2018, 05:20:12 AM
This "wiki"-like backup tool is meant as a outwardy insurance that one does not be afraid that anything possible good can be desroyed or made bad while looking for cleaning it. So worry at all, kamma does not dissapear. No need to fear to make good deeds, knowing that.
 

Johann

March 19, 2018, 04:03:35 AM
And there is no intention to just make a museum out of a working and concentration camp, since the Dhamma can not be understood by just looking on forms but by learning and experiance skillful deeds.
 

Johann

March 19, 2018, 04:00:47 AM
Post-history: http://sangham.net/index.php/topic,1164.0.html (but there is no notification system). My person uses to make a @mention , off topic "/me" in the OP.
 

Johann

March 19, 2018, 03:49:28 AM
Or to simply make a new post. No need to be shy in doing good things. It's not a museum, it's a working and concentration place. Mudita.
 

Johann

March 19, 2018, 03:47:57 AM
There is such as a "wiki" backup function in all posts, Nyom Danilo. Good is to use the mention option, at the places where making changes @Johann , that it gets not "lost".
 

Danilo

March 19, 2018, 03:02:46 AM
I have a backup of the original post in any case. I might review the second post next time. Very insightful teaching. _/\_
 

Danilo

March 19, 2018, 03:01:35 AM
I've recently fixed many words and sentences of the first post of the thread "Debts, but to whom?". It take me some time trying to figure out the meaning of some sentences. So it would be good if Bhante could check if the original intended meaning of the post still intact. I have a backup of the ori
 

Danilo

March 19, 2018, 01:57:28 AM
_/\_ _/\_ _/\_
 

Johann

March 19, 2018, 12:01:09 AM
One leading to peaks pointing downward so that aging, sickness and death can be seen, know him/her as a sage, a giver of release.
 

Johann

March 18, 2018, 11:57:30 PM
One leading people to papanca, promoting rejoicing in objectification as the heart wood, increases to fields of corpse in the world.

Show 50 latest
Members
Stats
  • Total Posts: 14153
  • Total Topics: 2735
  • Online Today: 36
  • Online Ever: 90
  • (September 25, 2014, 05:26:29 AM)
Users Online
Users: 0
Guests: 22
Total: 22