//honeypot demagogic

 Forum DhammaCitta. Forum Diskusi Buddhis Indonesia

Author Topic: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??  (Read 36010 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Peace

  • Bukan Tamu
  • *
  • Posts: 37
  • Reputasi: 2
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #75 on: 27 June 2008, 09:16:53 PM »
Ada namun tak ada, tak ada namun ada...
Tiada yg kekal di semesta, yg kekal adalah ketidakkekalan itu sendiri,..

ketika kita terikat pada ajaran, kita justru semakin jauh dari pencerahan
ketika kita melekat pada doktrin, kita justru semakin sulit mencapai pembebasan
pelajari semua, lalu lupakan semua..
tiada 'keinginan' untuk jadi baik,
tiada 'keinginan' untuk jadi buddha,
bahkan tiada 'keinginan' untuk Nibbana...

semua serba tiada, namun ke-tiada-an itu sesungguhnya merupakan ke-ada-an..

tapi..,
sehubungan dengan konsep anatta...
satu pertanyaan lagi, mohon petunjuk para senior di sini,
Jika bukan nihilisme, dan juga bukan eternalisme..
Nibbana jelas bukan nihilisme,  namun apakah Nibbana juga tak kekal dan bersifat sementara?

 _/\_



Wahhhh... kata" yang dalamm.... Bijak sekali....

dalam sekejam dalam tersadarkan Nurani ku ini....

THX BANGET

semoga bisa terukir didalam Nurani dan Otakku ini...

takkan kulupakan posting ini...

selama ini yg saya pikirkan hanyalah.. membina diri untuk mencapai tingkat kebuddhaan...

tapi dari sini.. saya berpikir kembali.. jadi Buddha ato tidak bukanlah suatu masalah.. melainkan jalanilah semua dengan niat yang baik dan Nurani yang makin hari makin cemerlang... maka hasilnya juga pasti akan di nikmati...

 _/\_

Offline vathena

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 910
  • Reputasi: 41
  • Gender: Female
  • where there is a hatred , let us sow love
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #76 on: 01 January 2009, 09:49:31 PM »
Dalam agama Buddha,Tuhan tidak dipandang sebagai suatu pribadi yang kepadanya kita menggantungkan nasib/harapan.
Keep the torch of Dhamma alight! Let it shine brightly in your daily life. Always remember, Dhamma is not an escape. It is an art of living , living in peace and harmony with oneself and also with all others. Hence, try to live a Dhamma life.

Offline Juice_alpukat

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 734
  • Reputasi: 11
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #77 on: 25 July 2010, 08:54:04 AM »
^ benar
« Last Edit: 25 July 2010, 08:59:18 AM by Juice_alpukat »

Offline Tommy Fong

  • Bukan Tamu
  • *
  • Posts: 35
  • Reputasi: 2
  • Semoga semua mahluk berbahagia
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #78 on: 25 July 2010, 03:42:12 PM »
Kalau konsep ketuhanan tidak ada, lantas siapa yang mengatur karma kita? Contohnya sy berbuat jahat dan harus menerima karma buruk pada kehidupan berikutnya. Siapa yang akan menentukan sy lahir dimana, dari keluarga apa, lahir cacat atau tidak, kaya atau gembel, dll

Offline Sunkmanitu Tanka Ob'waci

  • Sebelumnya: Karuna, Wolverine, gachapin
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 5.806
  • Reputasi: 239
  • Gender: Male
  • 会いたい。
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #79 on: 25 July 2010, 09:37:11 PM »
Kalau konsep ketuhanan tidak ada, lantas siapa yang mengatur karma kita? Contohnya sy berbuat jahat dan harus menerima karma buruk pada kehidupan berikutnya. Siapa yang akan menentukan sy lahir dimana, dari keluarga apa, lahir cacat atau tidak, kaya atau gembel, dll

ada 5 niyama, hukum sebab akibat yang tidak merupakan suatu persona. hukum ini berjalan tanpa ada yang mengatur.
bukan hanya kamma niyama, tetapi ada juga niyama lain, misalnya sebab akibat pikiran, sebab akibat fisika, dan lainnya.
HANYA MENERIMA UCAPAN TERIMA KASIH DALAM BENTUK GRP
Fake friends are like shadows never around on your darkest days

Offline No Pain No Gain

  • Sebelumnya: Doggie
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 2.796
  • Reputasi: 73
  • Gender: Male
  • ..............????
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #80 on: 25 July 2010, 09:41:06 PM »
om kwaci..trus..sapa yg ciptain tuh hukum?
No matter how dirty my past is,my future is still spotless

Offline Sunkmanitu Tanka Ob'waci

  • Sebelumnya: Karuna, Wolverine, gachapin
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 5.806
  • Reputasi: 239
  • Gender: Male
  • 会いたい。
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #81 on: 25 July 2010, 09:47:33 PM »
Revising Bhante’s Teaching of the Five Niyamas
Dhivan
Sangharakshita has recently described the five niyamas as part of his legacy of Dharma
teachings. (1) For the last couple of years I have been looking into the traditional Pali sources for
Bhante’s teaching on the five niyamas, and to my surprise have discovered that things are not as I
expected. There is in fact little basis in the Pali sources for Bhante’s exposition of the five niyamas; his
exposition of dhamma-niyama especially is unfounded. It seems that what Bhante says about the five
niyamas is more or less an elaboration on what Mrs Rhys Davids said about them in her 1912 book
Buddhism (2); unfortunately, what she writes there is somewhat misleading.
In this article I will summarise the Pali sources of the teaching of the five niyamas, for the sake
of reference, to put into context what Mrs Rhys Davids and Bhante make of them. The point of this
article is not to criticise anyone, but to clarify doctrine. I asked Bhante by letter for some information
about the sources for his teaching on the five niyamas, but he did not reply; I also talked over my
conclusions about dhamma-niyama with him last year, and he expressed some interest in them. I hope
to have a longer version of this article, with Pali diacritics and fuller discussion, published in Western
Buddhist Review at some point (editor willing).
the meaning of ‘niyama’ and ‘pañcavidha niyama’
‘Niyama’ in Pali and in Sanskrit comes from an old Vedic root ‘yam’, meaning ‘restrain’. The
words ‘yama’ and ‘niyama’ are used in Patañjali’s Yoga Sutras to mean ‘ethical restraint’ and ‘discipline’
respectively, and this meaning of ‘niyama’ is found also in later Pali. But the word ‘niyama’ is more
often used in an extended sense in Pali to mean ‘necessity’ or ‘constraint’, i.e. things having to be a
certain way. The word ‘niyamena’, literally ‘by necessity’, is used in both Pali and Sanskrit in just the
same way as the English adverb ‘necessarily’.
The expression ‘five niyamas’ comes from the Pali expression ‘pañcavidha niyama’, which more
literally means ‘fivefold niyama’. What is meant by ‘niyama’ in the formula of ‘fivefold niyama’ (i.e. the
five niyamas) is that there are five ways in which things must necessarily happen. It makes some sense
to translate ‘niyama’ here as ‘order’, hence the idea that there is a ‘fivefold order’ in the universe, i.e.
there are five ways in which things must happen. From the point of view of the original Pali expression,
however, the kind of ‘order’ that is meant here is a matter of necessity and constraint. (3)
The expression ‘five orders of conditionality’ is therefore more of a gloss or interpretation on
Bhante’s part than a translation of the Pali expression ‘pañcavidha niyama’. That doesn’t mean it’s
wrong of course; only that we should be aware of the difference between a translation and an
interpretation.
fivefold niyama in the Pali commentaries
It is well known that the list of ‘pañcavidha niyama’, fivefold niyama or the five niyamas, is only
found in the commentaries, not in the Pali canon. In fact, it only occurs twice in the whole
commentarial literature. The first occurrence is in the commentary to the Mahaapadaana Sutta in the
Diigha Nikaaya. Here the Buddha is describing the life of the former Buddha Vipassi, and tells of
sixteen special occurrences at the time of Vipassi’s birth, things which always happen at the birth of a
Buddha-to-be. Some are pious, such as his mother being completely virtuous; some are sad, such as her
dying after seven days; and many are supernatural, such as the earthquake that rocks the entire universe
at the descent of the bodhisatta into his mother’s womb. After describing each special occurrence, the
Buddha says ‘and all this is natural [dhammataa]’. (4)
The word ‘dhammataa’ is an abstract noun derived from ‘dhamma’, and it could also be
rendered ‘according to dhamma’. The commentary takes it upon itself to explain what is meant by
‘dhammataa’ here. It first glosses ‘dhammataa’ as ‘sabhaava’ (nature) and as ‘niyama’ (order or
necessity). Then it goes on to explain the fivefold niyama. (5) I will quote Walpola Rahula’s summary of
the passage (I will do this because Rahula is writing about dhammataa, not the fivefold niyama, so he is
not trying to make any particular point about niyama):
‘The commentary goes on to enumerate five kinds of niyaama “order of things”: (i) kammaniyaama
“the order of kamma”, i.e. good actions produce good results and bad actions produce bad
results; (ii) utu-niyaama “the order of the seasons”, i.e. in certain regions of the earth at certain periods
the flowering and fruiting of trees, the blowing or ceasing of wind, the degree of the heat of the sun,
the amount of rain-fall, some flowers like the lotuses opening during the day and closing at night and
so on; (iii) biija-niyaama “the order of seeds or germs”, i.e. a seed producing its own kind as barley seed
produces barley; (iv) citta-niyaama “the order of mind”, i.e. the order of the process of mind-activities as
the preceding thought-moment causing and conditioning the succeeding one in a cause and effect
relation; (v) dhamma-niyaama “the order of dhamma”, i.e. such events like the quaking of the ten
thousand world-systems at the Bodhisatta’s conception in his mother’s womb and at his birth. At the
end of the discussion the Commentary decides that in this case the dhammataa refers to dhammaniyaama.’
(6)
The other occurrence of pañcavidha niyama is in the Atthasaalinii, the commentary on the
Dhammasangani, the first book of the Theravaada Abhidhamma Pitaka. (7) The exposition of fivefold
niyama here is very similar, the only difference being that the emphasis is on how the citta-niyaama is an
automatic, natural process of perception, as described by the very complex Abhidhamma theory of
unconscious mind-moments. This process is thus compared to the seasonal patterns of plants and
weather, how the seeds of plants sprout as plants of the same sort, how good actions lead to good
results and bad actions to bad, and how there are always earthquakes at the birth of the bodhisatta. The
Atthasaalinii seems to take for granted the list of fivefold niyama but uses it to illustrate different kinds
of natural, non-volitional processes that happen of their own accord.
the meaning of dhamma-niyama
We can therefore see from the commentary that niyaama means ‘order’ in the sense of
‘necessity’, and that the commentary emphasises how this necessity and order are natural. There is a
problem, however, with what is meant by ‘dhamma-niyama’ in the list of fivefold niyama. The term is
used to explain how the miraculous events attending the life of a Buddha are natural and necessary. The
only direct example given for what the term is used to mean is the earthquakes that accompany various
significant moments in the lives of Buddhas. The commentary therefore seems to suggest that miracles
are natural, which logically appears to be a contradiction. This problem might have been part of what
set Mrs Rhys Davids on the wrong track, as I will discuss soon.
There is an explanation of this problem, though, which starts from asking what problem the
commentary was trying to solve. The commentary is trying its best to explain something difficult – how
supernatural occurrences like earthquakes at the conception of the bodhisatta are all a part of nature
and natural law. The explanation it gives is not convincing, however, because it only raises a bigger
question – why is the nature of the universe such that there have to be earthquakes and so on when a
bodhisatta is born? It might have been more convincing if the commentary had distinguished between
the truth of fact and the truth of myth, and explained the earthquakes etc. in terms of archetypal
symbols of the imagination that communicated the cosmic significance of events concerning the
Buddha. Another way of putting this is to say that the commentary is being much too literal, and in fact
the Pali commentaries are very often like this.
With this in mind, we can conclude that dhamma-niyama does not literally refer to the necessity
of supernatural events. In fact, it simply means ‘necessity of nature’ or ‘natural law’, as is evident from
other occurrences of the term in the suttas and commentaries. It is a synonym for conditionality as a
whole. The word ‘niyama’ is used interchangeably with the word ‘niyaama’ in the Pali commentaries,
and ‘niyama’ and ‘niyaama’ seem really to be synonymous in both Pali and Sanskrit. (8) The word
‘niyaama’ is used in the Pali suttas in the expression ‘sammattaniyaama’, ‘the necessity of rightness’,
referring to the way a stream-entrant is destined to gain awakening. (9) The commentary says that the
stream-entrant is ‘destined’ because of ‘dhamma-niyaama’, that is, because it is a necessity of nature or
the way things are that a stream-entrant should gain awakening. (10)
The word ‘niyaama’ appears in the expression ‘dhamma-niyaamataa’ found in the suttas,
meaning ‘the fixed course of dhamma’. This expression is part of a formula used to describe
paticcasamuppaada, which runs: ‘And what, bhikkhus, is dependent arising? … whether Tathagatas
arise or not, that element still persists, the stableness of dhammas, the fixed course of dhamma, specific
conditionality…’ (11) The commentary explains the expression ‘dhamma-niyaamataa’ by saying that the
condition (e.g. birth) fixes (niyameti) the dependently-arisen phenomena (e.g. old age and death), and
for this reason ‘the fixed course of dhamma’ describes dependent arising. The commentary takes
‘dhamma’ here to mean ‘dhammas’ in the sense of ‘things that have dependently arisen’. Bhikkhu
Bodhi, however, disagrees with the commentary and argues that ‘dhamma’ here must mean ‘the
principle or lawfulness that holds sway over phenomena’. (12) But the Pali compound is ambiguous,
and ‘dhamma-niyaamataa’ could mean ‘the fixed course of the Dhamma [the principle]’, ‘the fixed
course of dhammas [natural phenomena]’ or ‘the fixed course of dhamma [nature]’. In another
commentarial passage, however, the ‘dhamma’ in ‘dhamma-niyaamataa’ is equated with ‘sabhaava’,
which simply means ‘nature’. (13)
HANYA MENERIMA UCAPAN TERIMA KASIH DALAM BENTUK GRP
Fake friends are like shadows never around on your darkest days

Offline Sunkmanitu Tanka Ob'waci

  • Sebelumnya: Karuna, Wolverine, gachapin
  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 5.806
  • Reputasi: 239
  • Gender: Male
  • 会いたい。
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #82 on: 25 July 2010, 09:47:50 PM »
The commentaries also comment on the story that the Buddha, prior to his awakening, gave up
the asceticism he had been practicing with five fellow ascetics. At this point the Buddha reports that
‘then those five monks, disgusted, left me’. The commentary says about this: ‘Their being dissatisfied
and leaving was just through a necessity of nature (dhamma-niyaama); their being gone was according
to dhamma (dhammataa) in the sense of the gift of an opportunity for bodily seclusion and the
bodhisatta’s full awakening in the time obtained.’ (14)
Overall, then, the term ‘dhamma-niyama’ is used in the commentaries in a way that leans on the
sutta expression ‘dhamma-niyaamataa’, which is a synonym for conditionality in the sense that there is
an intrinsic necessity of things in nature and the universe. But the way it is used in practice is always in
relation to apparently unnatural or surprising things – not just about the earthquakes that occur at
certain moments in the lives of Buddhas, but also about the inevitable awakening of a stream-entrant
after a certain number of future lives, and the way the five ascetics necessarily left the Buddha so that
he could be alone. One might say that dhamma-niyama is used both to mean the ‘order of nature’,
synonymous with conditionality, and specifically to mean ‘the surprising but necessary nature of things.’
Mrs Rhys Davids on fivefold niyama
Bhante takes dhamma-niyama to mean ‘transcendental order of conditionality’. By
‘transcendental order of conditionality’ he means the progressive and creative mode of conditionality
belonging to the ‘spiral path’ leading from samsara to nirvana, exemplified by the ‘positive nidaanas’.
However, dhamma-niyama in the suttas and commentaries does not mean this, but refers to
conditionality as a whole. Of course, what Bhante means by the ‘transcendental order of conditionality’
is part of conditionality as a whole, but it would be tendentious to argue that dhamma-niyama is limited
to only part of the whole. I think Bhante’s mistaken interpretation of dhamma-niyama may be based on
what Mrs Rhys Davids wrote about the niyamas.
C.A.F. Rhys Davids was the first western scholar to draw attention to the list of pañcavidha
niyama, in her little book of 1912 entitled simply Buddhism. Her reason for mentioning it was to
emphasise how for Buddhism we exist in a ‘moral universe’ in which actions lead to just consequences
according to a natural moral order, a situation she calls a ‘cosmodicy’ in contrast with the Christian
theodicy. She then explains:
‘This order which Buddhism saw in the universe was called in Pali niyama, that is, going-on,
process. In it five branches, strands, phases were discerned:– kamma-niyama, order of act-and-result; utuniyama,
physical (inorganic) order; biija-niyama, order of germs, or seeds (physical organic order); chittaniyama,
order of mind, or conscious life; dhamma-niyama, order of the norm, or the effort of nature to
produce a perfect type.’ (15)
There are several things to notice about Mrs RD’s presentation. One is that she translates the
terms for kinds of niyama in ways that are reminiscent of modern science: ‘physical inorganic order’,
‘physical organic order’, etc. Despite the fact that she also later cites the commentary’s examples of
these orders, which belong to pre-scientific observations of nature, her use of scientific-sounding terms
is significant as it prepares the way for Bhante and other exegetes to connect fivefold niyama with laws
of science. Second, she defines dhamma-niyama as ‘the effort of nature to produce a perfect type’. She
later adds: ‘we may define the dhamma-niyama as the order of things concerned with the production by
the cosmos of its perfect or norm type.’ This definition would appear to be the starting-point for
Bhante’s understanding of dhamma-niyama as the ‘transcendental order’.
Where does Mrs Rhys Davids get this idea of dhamma-niyama? Not from the commentaries.
She seems to have made it up. There exists, however, a record of the correspondence between Mrs RD
and the Burmese scholar Ledi Sayadaw in which her understanding of dhamma-niyama is straightened
out. (16) By this time Mrs RD had apparently realised that dhamma-niyama was in fact a synonym for
conditionality as whole, and Ledi Sayadaw explains that in this sense it includes the other four kinds of
niyama, though there are certain surprising things, like the earthquakes, that do not fit into those four,
and hence dhamma-niyama has to be included as a ‘miscellaneous’ category in the list of fivefold
niyama. Mrs Rhys Davids goes on to agree with Ledi Sayadaw’s suggestion that the law of nature
whereby Buddhas are produced could be called ‘buddha-niyama’. That is to say she concedes that
dhamma-niyama does not in fact mean the natural process whereby Buddhas are produced, but that the
expression ‘buddha-niyama’ would mean this. This would be another kind of niyama within the overall
dhamma-niyama or conditionality.
This interpretation of the meaning of dhamma-niyama is confirmed independently by the Thai
scholar-monk P.A. Payutto, who writes: ‘The first four niyama are contained within, or based on, the
fifth one, Dhammaniyama, the Law of Dhamma, or the Law of Nature. It may be questioned why
Dhammaniyama, being as it were the totality, is also included within the subdivisions. This is because
this fourfold categorization does not cover the entire extent of Dhammaniyama.’ (17)
Sangharakshita on fivefold niyama
Bhante describes the five niyamas as different orders or levels of cause and effect or
conditionality obtaining in the universe, and always lists them in the following order:
(i) utu-niyama or ‘physical inorganic order’, the ‘law of cause and effect as operative on the level of
inorganic matter. It very roughly embraces the laws of physics and chemistry and associated disciplines.’
(ii) biija-niyama or ‘physical organic or biological order’, the ‘physical organic order whose laws
constitute the science of biology.’
(iii) citta-niyama or ‘(non-volitional) mental order’, the ‘law of cause and effect as operative in the world
of the mind – and we may say that it is a concept which corresponds to the modern science of
psychology.’
(iv) kamma-niyama or ‘volitional order’, the ‘principle of conditionality operative on the moral plane.’
(v) dhamma-niyama or ‘transcendental order’, the principle of conditionality as it operates on the
spiritual or transcendental level as opposed to the mundane. (18)
Bhante takes dhamma-niyama to mean the ‘transcendental order of conditionality’, which of
course he also describes in terms of the ‘spiral path’ and the positive nidaanas. There are plenty of
sources in the Pali texts for what Bhante says about the positive nidaanas. The early commentarial text,
the Nettipakarana, specifically mentions ‘lokuttara paticcasamuppaada’ (transcendental conditionality)
in reference to the positive nidaanas. (19) However, as should be clear by now, the term dhammaniyama
does not and cannot refer specifically to the positive nidaanas. The word ‘dhamma’ does not
mean ‘transcendental’, and the term ‘dhamma-niyama’ means ‘order of nature’ in general, and is more
or less synonymous with the whole of conditionality.
What then is the niyama that describes the spiral path? Such a term is not found in the Pali
literature, but ‘magga-niyama’ would do the job – ‘order of the path’. I am not envisaging that such a
term should actually be taken up by anyone; I am just noticing that it is theoretically possible to identify
a kind of niyama that corresponds to what Bhante says about the ‘transcendental order of
conditionality’.
Going back to the other niyamas, it’s clear that Bhante wishes to interpret the first three as
corresponding (‘roughly’) with scientific disciplines, namely physics/chemistry, biology and psychology.
It seems to me that modern interpreters of Buddhism, including Mrs Rhys Davids and Bhante, have an
understandable desire to present the Dharma in such a way that it is compatible with the successful and
powerful methodology of modern science. However, the scheme of fivefold niyama was developed in
the quite different intellectual milieu of abhidhamma, in which, for instance, reality was analysed into
‘dhammas’ lasting fractions of a second. Using the scheme of fivefold niyama to integrate Buddhism
with science is like putting new wine into old wineskins – they aren’t up to the job. Given that Bhante’s
teaching about the ‘transcendental order of conditionality’ is not in fact included in the traditional
fivefold niyama, it seems to me pointless trying to squeeze the laws of science and the positive nidaanas
into a concept that was not designed to contain them.
conclusion
Probably this essay will read to some as pedantic. And indeed, in the big scheme of things, what
could be the harm in us continuing to talk about the five niyamas, and to teach this list to mitras? I can
see two disadvantages in our doing so. First, Bhante’s teaching on five niyamas is misleading in the
sense that ‘dhamma niyama’ does not mean ‘transcendental order of conditionality’ in the Pali sources,
so there is an issue of accuracy and truth to the sources. Second, because Bhante’s teaching on the five
niyamas is more of an innovation, a creative interpretation, than a traditional teaching, then it will be
difficult to communicate with other Buddhists if we continue talking as if it really is a traditional
teaching. Even Theravadins might scratch their heads over it. (20) This is important given that Bhante’s
reason for teaching the five niyamas is to combat the idea that everything that happens is because of
karma. He writes: ‘in Tibetan Buddhism, and in the Mahaayaana generally, there is a tendency to think
that everything that happens to you is a result of your own personal past karma, although the teaching
of the five niyamas makes it clear that that is not the case.’ (21) Dialogue with Buddhists who believe
that everything happens due to karma will require clarity in terminology and concepts.
My suggestion is that we stop talking about the five niyamas and simply talk about ‘orders of
conditionality’. This term, in English, does all the work of Bhante’s five niyamas but without the
problems. So – there is (i) the objective order of conditionality corresponding to the physical and
biological sciences; there is (ii) the subjective order of conditionality corresponding to psychology; there
is (iii) the ethical order of conditionality corresponding to the law of karma; and there is (iv) the
transcendental order of conditionality corresponding to the path to awakening. It would be perfectly
reasonable to say that the teaching of ‘the orders of conditionality’ is suggested by or even derived from
the traditional commentarial teaching of fivefold niyama. But Bhante’s teaching of ‘orders of
conditionality’ is bigger, more inclusive and more relevant than that.
Dhivan, Cambridge April 2009. A very much more detailed version of this article is available on
www.dhivan.net
notes
1. http://www.videosangha.net/video/Sangharakshita-and-his-Legacy
2. C.A.F. Rhys Davids Buddhism: a study of the Buddhist norm London: Williams and Norgate 1912,
pp.118–9.
3. The PTS Dictionary includes ‘cosmic order’ under its definition of ‘niyama’. In my opinion, however,
Rhys Davids and Stede were too much influenced by Mrs Rhys Davids here, who, as we will see, was
responsible for many people, including Bhante, seeing more in fivefold niyama than is really there.
4. Digha Nikaya, sutta 14, PTS vol.2, p.12–15.
5. DA p.432. The commentary on the Digha Nikaya is also called the Sumangala Vilasani.
6. Walpola Rahula ‘Wrong Notions of Dhammmataa’ in L. Cousins et al, eds., Buddhist Studies in Honour of
I.B. Horner Dordrecht: Reidel 1974, p.183.
7. Trans. Pe Maung Tin The Expositor PTS London 1921 vol.II, p.360.
8. Monier Williams p.552; PED p.368. The PED seems to want to make a distinction between the
words but is self-contradictory in doing so.
9. E.g. at Samyutta Nikaya 25:1, in Bhikkhu Bodhi trans. p.1004. He translates it as ‘fixed course of
rightness.’
10. DA p. 313; also Ud-A p.290. Dr Margaret Cone gave me these references.
11. Samyutta Nikaya 12:20, in Bhikkhu Bodhi trans. p.551.
12. Bhikkhu Bodhi p.741.
13. AA vol.2, p.380.
14. M vol.1, p.247; MA vol.2, p.219. My translation.
15. Buddhism p.119.
16. Ledi Sayadaw, trans. Beni Barua and ed. Mrs Rhys Davids, Manuals of Buddhism Bangkok:
Mahamakut Press 1978 (originally published 1916).
17. P.A. Payutto, trans. Bruce Evans Good, Evil and Beyond: kamma in the Buddha’s teachings (online).
18. The main written sources are in The Three Jewels Windhorse 1977 (originally published 1967)
Windhorse pp.69–70 and in the lecture ‘Karma and Rebirth’, in edited form in Who is the Buddha?
Windhorse 1994, pp.105–8.
19. Mentioned in Bhikkhu Bodhi’s essay Transcendental Dependent Arising, online.
20. Though in fact Mrs Rhys Davids’ creative interpretation has spread to many Theravadin exegetical
works – for instance, Narada Thera’s The Buddha and His Teaching, and even to David Kalupahana’s
scholarly Causality: the central philosophy of Buddhism.
21. Transforming Self and World p.205.
HANYA MENERIMA UCAPAN TERIMA KASIH DALAM BENTUK GRP
Fake friends are like shadows never around on your darkest days

Offline Triyana2009

  • Sahabat Baik
  • ****
  • Posts: 756
  • Reputasi: 4
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #83 on: 22 September 2010, 10:29:54 PM »
Namo Buddhaya,

Menurut saya pertanyaan anda kurang jelas, untuk dapat mengatakan Tuhan/tuhan itu ada atau tidak pertama-tama anda harus mendefinisikan dahulu Tuhan/tuhan yang anda maksud.

Theravada maupun Mahayana mengenal konsep Ketuhanan.

Jadi Tuhan/tuhan mana yang anda maksud?


 _/\_

Offline Riky_dave

  • KalyanaMitta
  • *****
  • Posts: 4.229
  • Reputasi: -14
  • Gender: Male
Re: Tuhan??Bagaimana konsep Tuhan dlm agama Buddha??
« Reply #84 on: 23 September 2010, 09:08:45 AM »
Namo Buddhaya,

Menurut saya pertanyaan anda kurang jelas, untuk dapat mengatakan Tuhan/tuhan itu ada atau tidak pertama-tama anda harus mendefinisikan dahulu Tuhan/tuhan yang anda maksud.

Theravada maupun Mahayana mengenal konsep Ketuhanan.

Jadi Tuhan/tuhan mana yang anda maksud?


 _/\_

Bro Tri yang baik,

tolong anda lihat ini

«  on: 10 May 2008, 12:08:56 PM »

itu pertanyaan 2 tahun yang lalu,dan saya sudah mendapatkan jawaban yang lebih baik dari yang Anda tahu,kurasa.. :)
Langkah pertama adalah langkah yg terakhir...