Did sin enter the world through Adam, Satan or Yahweh?

[Blues Man]

• Sin easily develops.—Rock Inscriptions of Asoka. [Source: “The Essence of Buddhism” Edited by E. Haldeman-Julius, 1922, Project Gutenberg]
• He sees danger in even the least of those things he should avoid.—Tevijja-sutta.
• May I never do, nor cause to be done, nor contemplate the doing of, even the most trivial sin!—Attanagalu-vansa (conclusion).
• Scrupulously avoiding all wicked actions; Reverently performing all virtuous ones; Purifying his intention from all selfish ends: This is the doctrine of all the Buddhas. —Siau-chi-kwan.
• The sinner is never beautiful.—Lalita Vistara.
• He who ... cannot feel joy to see merit in others is stained with the darkness of sin.—Story of Pratiharyya.
• Those who have sin at heart, but are sweet of speech, are like a pitcher smeared with nectar, but full of poison.—Lalita Vistara.
• Causing destruction to living beings, killing and mutilating, ... stealing and speaking falsely, fraud and deception, ... these are (what defile a man).—Amagandha-sutta.
• You do not well enticing me to a sinful act. And what you say, that "nobody else will know of it"—will it be less sinful for this reason?—Jatakamala.
• There is no such thing as secrecy in wrongdoing.—Jataka.
• Therefore ... we would humble ourselves and repent us of our sins. Oh! that we may have strength to do so aright!—Liturgy of Kwan-yin.
• If we know that we have done wrong, and yet refuse to acknowledge it, we are guilty of prevarication.—Chinese Pratimoksha.
• From the very first, ... having no wish to benefit others, or to do good in the least degree, we have been adding sin unto sin; and even though our actual crimes have not been so great, yet a wicked heart has ruled us within. Day and night, without interval or hesitation, have we continually contrived how to do wrong.—Liturgy of Kwan-yin.
• Accept the confession I make of my sin in its sinfulness, to the end that in future I may restrain myself therefrom.—Cullavagga.
• May I never, even in a dream, be guilty of theft, adultery, drunkenness, life-slaughter, and untruthfulness.—Attanagalu-vansa.

What one person shpuld svoid is not what another has to as I have already explained to you

 

[ding]

And they don't speak for all Buddhists.

Just as many others say the concept of sin has no place in Buddhism.

You call them prominent because their opinions jive with yours.

I call them prominent because they are.

Maybe one day your words will be quoted by someone but until then they are more of authorities on Buddhism than you are.

 

[ding]

What one person shpuld svoid is not what another has to as I have already explained to you

Like I said before... a rose by any other name is still a rose.

 

[Blues Man]

I call them prominent because they are.

Maybe one day your words will be quoted by someone but until then they are more of authorities on Buddhism than you are.

It's your opinion that they are prominent not mine.

And you haven't quoted every single source of opinion on Buddhism.

 

[Blues Man]

Like I said before... a rose by any other name is still a rose.

There is no rose.

What "sin": causes you to suffer may not cause someone else to suffer. How can it be a sin then?

 

[ding]

It's your opinion that they are prominent not mine.

And you haven't quoted every single source of opinion on Buddhism.

The referenced sources say otherwise.

Don't need to reference quoted every single source of opinion on Buddhism. I have referenced more than you have.

 

[ding]

There is no rose.

What "sin": causes you to suffer may not cause someone else to suffer. How can it be a sin then?

And yet Buddhism is full of teachings that don't make that distinction. In fact, Buddhism definitively teaches things one should not do. There's the rose.

 

[Blues Man]

The referenced sources say otherwise.

Don't need to reference quoted every single source of opinion on Buddhism. I have referenced more than you have.

And yet you have not referenced anything from the original teachings or direct Pali to English translations.

The Abrahamic concept of sin has no place in Buddhism and there is nothing prohibited in Buddhism that can be called a "sin" even in it's most loose interpretation.

The Buddha taught that all suffering is a result of craving but craving is not a sin and is not prohibited.

It is the craving of that which cannot be achieved that is the problem. One cannot hope never to die never to be ill, never to experience the grief of loss etc yet even that type of craving is not callED a "sin".

 

[Blues Man]

And yet Buddhism is full of teachings that don't make that distinction. In fact, Buddhism definitively teaches things one should not do. There's the rose.

You think it's a rose it's not

 

[ding]

And yet you have not referenced anything from the original teachings or direct Pali to English translations.

The Abrahamic concept of sin has no place in Buddhism and there is nothing prohibited in Buddhism that can be called a "sin" even in it's most loose interpretation.

The Buddha taught that all suffering is a result of craving but craving is not a sin and is not prohibited.

It is the craving of that which cannot be achieved that is the problem. One cannot hope never to die never to be ill, never to experience the grief of loss etc yet even that type of craving is not callED a "sin".

A rose by any other name is still a rose. It's hard to teach what you should do when you can't teach what you shouldn't do.

 

[ding]

You think it's a rose it's not

Are there things Buddhists teach that you shouldn't do? There's your rose.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

It is a figurative story. A metaphor.

 

[Blues Man]

The referenced sources say otherwise.

Don't need to reference quoted every single source of opinion on Buddhism. I have referenced more than you have.

So what?

You clip a line from a quote ate call it a referenced source.

There is no context. There is no analysis of the Buddha's actual words or the how the different schools of Buddhism interpret them.

The Buddha did not teach that there was anything that was prohibited but rather gave examples how some behaviors may lead to suffering. But there has always been the realization that what causes one person suffering may not cause all people to suffer so therefore it cannot be called a "sin".

Like I said not all schools of Buddhism teach that one should abstain from meat even though some Buddhists teach that it is not prohibited to eat meat.

 

[Blues Man]

Are there things Buddhists teach that you shouldn't do? There's your rose.

There is nothing prohibited in Buddhism

There is no rose.

 

[DGS49]

So Buddhists are cool with hamburgers? Fur coats? Friday Fish Fry's?

Who knew?

 

[Blues Man]

So Buddhists are cool with hamburgers? Fur coats? Friday Fish Fry's?

Who knew?

There are no prohibitions on any of those things.

I know practicing Buddhists who eat meat.

 

[ding]

So what?

You clip a line from a quote ate call it a referenced source.

There is no context. There is no analysis of the Buddha's actual words or the how the different schools of Buddhism interpret them.

The Buddha did not teach that there was anything that was prohibited but rather gave examples how some behaviors may lead to suffering. But there has always been the realization that what causes one person suffering may not cause all people to suffer so therefore it cannot be called a "sin".

Like I said not all schools of Buddhism teach that one should abstain from meat even though some Buddhists teach that it is not prohibited to eat meat.

You have so much animus towards religion that it is clouding your judgement.

 

[ding]

There is nothing prohibited in Buddhism

There is no rose.

I've explained it to you at least three times.

 

[Blues Man]

You have so much animus towards religion that it is clouding your judgement.

No I just know the difference between your religion and the Buddhist philosophy you don't

 

[Blues Man]

I've explained it to you at least three times.

And you're still wrong.

The Buddha never told anyone that they should not ____________________.