DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**lopaayd** · 10-30-2011, 09:18 AM

Stuka

as i already suggested, 'soteriology' does not always imply total soteriology (solace/liberation)

it seems only supramundane buddhadhamma can offer 100% soteriology

but to limit soteriology to 100% soteriology would preclude most, if not all, other religions from soteriology

Which is why we see the Buddha differentiating between his and other teachings.

however, this is contrary to what the Buddha taught because the Buddha taught there are at least four ways of soteriology, including soteriology via loving-kindness (see MN 43) What part of MN43, Lazy?

if fact, in what appears contrary to your views, the Buddha seemed also teach about soteriology via morality

.....This is the first soteriology he acquires. That is a rather strange use of the word. Whose translation is this? Usually it is "this is the first assurance...", or "solace". You appear to be equivocating.

hi Stuka

you seem to be denigrating the mundane right view but it seems the Buddha did not share your attitude He denigrated it as well by calling it sasava, with effluents (effluvium - "sewage", defilements, etc). Your use of the term "denigrate" harks back to the bad old days of E-Stasi.

thus he specifically called it "right view" and praised it
"Sasava" is not exactly praise.

it seems the Buddha did not denigrate dhamma that encouraged morality, gratitude, respect for mother & father, fear of the lower worlds, etc

the Buddha praised honoring one's mother & father, etc, (even though this is the mundane right view)
He called it "sasava" and he made the distinction between it and his own teachings, which he distinguished as liberating, without asavas (anasava), Noble (ariyo) and a Factor of the Path. Rather silly of you to take the E-Sangha/Drama Wheel party line on this.

10-30-2011, 09:18 AM	#23
lopaayd Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 511 Senior Member	Stuka as i already suggested, 'soteriology' does not always imply total soteriology (solace/liberation) it seems only supramundane buddhadhamma can offer 100% soteriology but to limit soteriology to 100% soteriology would preclude most, if not all, other religions from soteriology Which is why we see the Buddha differentiating between his and other teachings. however, this is contrary to what the Buddha taught because the Buddha taught there are at least four ways of soteriology, including soteriology via loving-kindness (see MN 43) What part of MN43, Lazy? if fact, in what appears contrary to your views, the Buddha seemed also teach about soteriology via morality .....This is the first soteriology he acquires. That is a rather strange use of the word. Whose translation is this? Usually it is "this is the first assurance...", or "solace". You appear to be equivocating. hi Stuka you seem to be denigrating the mundane right view but it seems the Buddha did not share your attitude He denigrated it as well by calling it sasava, with effluents (effluvium - "sewage", defilements, etc). Your use of the term "denigrate" harks back to the bad old days of E-Stasi. thus he specifically called it "right view" and praised it "Sasava" is not exactly praise. it seems the Buddha did not denigrate dhamma that encouraged morality, gratitude, respect for mother & father, fear of the lower worlds, etc the Buddha praised honoring one's mother & father, etc, (even though this is the mundane right view) He called it "sasava" and he made the distinction between it and his own teachings, which he distinguished as liberating, without asavas (anasava), Noble (ariyo) and a Factor of the Path. Rather silly of you to take the E-Sangha/Drama Wheel party line on this.
	Quote