බාලිසිකොපම සූත්‍රය

[ek_rosh]

if you keep creating holes everywhere unconciously can you see it as not a problem,and the holes already created after ganing consiousness as not a problem

what is the probelm of creating hole everywhere? wts the danger?

 

[Emios]

what is the probelm of creating hole everywhere? wts the danger?

 

[Blair Solari]

මේ ට්‍රෙඩ් එකේ අන්තිමට මන් දාපු වීඩියෝ එක බලන්න. timestamp tag කරලා තියෙන්නේ..

 

[ek_rosh]

waiting for an answer

 

[Emios]

waiting for an answer

aren't you a mad man if so.that analogy doesn't fit well bro

 

[ek_rosh]

aren't you a mad man if so.that analogy doesn't fit well bro

why you try to fit anything..im asking a general question

 

[Emios]

why you try to fit anything..im asking a general question

imagine a projector keeps projecting films,one day you realize you are inside a projector as a character. does the film output is not a problem anymore? can you call it that way even if you realize. the proejctor is a problem

 

[ek_rosh]

imagine a projector keeps projecting films,one day you realize you are inside a projector as a character. does the film output is not a problem anymore? can you call it that way even if you realize. the proejctor is a problem

is the problem, project output or not knowing you were a character inside?

 

[Emios]

is the problem, project output or not knowing you were a character inside?

both,even if you know you are a charcter,projector keep producing films untill its decay.so output is always a problem well as not knowing.

 

[ek_rosh]

both,even if you know you are a charcter,projector keep producing films untill its decay.so output is always a problem well as not knowing.

after realizing there is no you there from the beginning, this is just a film itself what is the probem and who has the problem?

 

[Emios]

after realizing there is no you there from the beginning, this is just a film itself what is the probem and who has the problem?

realizing doesn't stop the output,buddha call it maraya,it always will be untill its decay.you cannot call the output was never a problem,only clinging was the problem.you said rupaye prashnayak ne.if output was never a problem you dont want to end the film.you can keep watching it.

 

[ek_rosh]

realizing doesn't stop the output,buddha call it maraya,it always will be untill its decay.you cannot call the output was never a problem,only clinging was the problem.you said rupaye prashnayak ne.if output was never a problem you dont want to end the film.you can keep watching it.

once realized there is nobody and nobody to be bothered, why NEED to stop the output?

 

[Emios]

once realized there is nobody and nobody to be bothered, why NEED to stop the output?

you are talking about ending of the film.then there is no need to parinirvana.output has to stop and must.you are going to neva sancyana na sancya

 

[ek_rosh]

you are talking about ending of the film.then there is no need to parinirvana.output has to stop and must.you are going to neva sancyana na sancya

who NEEDs parinibbana?

 

[Emios]

who NEEDs parinibbana?

again going to neva sancya na sacnya.get the context bro output has to stop.otherwise no need of buddhas dharma.there was nobody at all and film going on and no worries.who was there to worry.this is wrong quectioning

 

[ek_rosh]

again going to neva sancya na sacnya.get the context bro output has to stop.otherwise no need of buddhas dharma.there was nobody at all and film going on and no worries.who was there to worry.this is wrong quectioning

you need to understand...

with the realization there will be no more oil to the fire and hence the fire will set off NATURALLY.

not becuase of a NEED,
not because someone wants to set off the fire BECAUSE the fire is BAD\


btw, having difficulty giving answers doesnt make questions wrong ...lol

 

[Emios]

you need to understand...

with the realization there will be no more oil to the fire and hence the fire will set off NATURALLY.

not becuase of a NEED,
not because someone wants to set off the fire BECAUSE the fire is BAD

fire is bad,its buddhas words,its the output,if it never ends its a problem.output was always being the problem.in your context if the fire never ended it is not a problem.it is because of ending you call it there is no need.

in your case if fire never ended it is not an issue,because rupaya was never an issue

 

[ek_rosh]

in your case if fire never ended it is not an issue,because rupaya was never an issue

fire will end, NOT because of an issue...not becuase someone needs it... simply by the cut off of fuel at the arihat..

remember, buddha has repeatedly said, alll dukkas are ended at arihat...there is no more need to do

 

[Emios]

fire will end, NOT because of an issue...not becuase someone needs it... simply by the cut off of fuel at the arihat..

remember, buddha has repeatedly said, alll dukkas are ended at arihat...there is no more need to do

but you call fire was never an issue,if it never stopped could you call it that way.cutting of fuel is true.and the dukkha end is true,but the fire remains a mara till its decay.

 

[ek_rosh]

but you call fire was never an issue,if it never stopped could you call it that way.cutting of fuel is true.and the dukkha end is true,but the fire remains a mara till its decay.

whats the issue staying mara till it decays if he canot make any harm?