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

**Innockcroff** · 05-29-2012, 03:17 AM

Hello Deshy,

I am not going to answer the first part of your post becuase the answer is already inculded in my reply to "The Thinker" to avoid repeating myself.

Anyway, the pali canon is the earliest available resource at the moment, as far as I know. In Buddhism, followers are not encouraged to treat the pali canon as the gospel. It is just a reference point. You are welcome to read it, follow it and realize dhamma for yourself. Without following it, you will never know if it is accurate and how deep it goes. All you are left with is speculation like "did Ananda remember it right? Are they the exact original words of the Buddha?" etc I am not surprised when reading your pragmatic point of view (as usual). What i find most confusing is what draws the line between what is necessary part and what is the extra wieght.

In other words, do we really need to read the Pali canon at all? I am not sure if you heard the story of Suddhipanthaka who was dull and had a very bad memory that he could not understand anything from the Buddha's teachings. According to legend, he Buddha assigned him to sweep the ground and he kept doing so untill he got enlightened.

Do we really need all this knowledge to become free? or knowledge is the bondage?

05-29-2012, 03:17 AM	#15
Innockcroff Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 445 Senior Member	Hello Deshy, I am not going to answer the first part of your post becuase the answer is already inculded in my reply to "The Thinker" to avoid repeating myself. Anyway, the pali canon is the earliest available resource at the moment, as far as I know. In Buddhism, followers are not encouraged to treat the pali canon as the gospel. It is just a reference point. You are welcome to read it, follow it and realize dhamma for yourself. Without following it, you will never know if it is accurate and how deep it goes. All you are left with is speculation like "did Ananda remember it right? Are they the exact original words of the Buddha?" etc I am not surprised when reading your pragmatic point of view (as usual). What i find most confusing is what draws the line between what is necessary part and what is the extra wieght. In other words, do we really need to read the Pali canon at all? I am not sure if you heard the story of Suddhipanthaka who was dull and had a very bad memory that he could not understand anything from the Buddha's teachings. According to legend, he Buddha assigned him to sweep the ground and he kept doing so untill he got enlightened. Do we really need all this knowledge to become free? or knowledge is the bondage?
	Quote