Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Carolyn Rhys Davis and Anatta

Expand Messages
  • ruwanr2003
    Dear Friends I was reading the life story of Carolyn Rhys Davis and found that she rejected the concept of Anatta as an original teaching of Gotama Buddha. I
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 29, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear Friends

      I was reading the life story of Carolyn Rhys Davis and found that she
      rejected the concept of "Anatta" as an original teaching of Gotama
      Buddha.

      I am just wondering whether she had done any writing describing why she
      came to that conclusion.


      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Augusta_Foley_Rhys_Davids
    • Chanida
      Dear Ruwan, Perhaps it results from her study of Buddhist texts along with the Upanishad. Both traditions share many points. Many scholars who study both of
      Message 2 of 6 , Jul 29, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Dear Ruwan,

        Perhaps it results from her study of Buddhist texts along with the
        Upanishad. Both traditions share many points. Many scholars who study
        both of them share the same view, even though some disagree.

        This article of hers may reflect something in regard to her study.
        http://enlight.lib.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-ENG/rht.htm

        Metta,
        Chanida.

        --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "ruwanr2003" <ruwanr2003@...> wrote:
        >
        > Dear Friends
        >
        > I was reading the life story of Carolyn Rhys Davis and found that she
        > rejected the concept of "Anatta" as an original teaching of Gotama
        > Buddha.
        >
        > I am just wondering whether she had done any writing describing why
        she
        > came to that conclusion.
        >
        >
        > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Augusta_Foley_Rhys_Davids
        >
      • paulocuana
        Mrs. Rys-Davids rejection of anatta is usually attributed to the loss of her young child. Apparently, she couldn t accept that there was no soul or
        Message 3 of 6 , Jul 31, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Mrs. Rys-Davids rejection of "anatta" is usually attributed
          to the loss of her young child.
          Apparently, she couldn't accept that there was no "soul"
          or something that continued on.

          Best Wishes,
          Sumano

          --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "ruwanr2003" <ruwanr2003@...> wrote:
          >
          > Dear Friends
          >
          > I was reading the life story of Carolyn Rhys Davis and found that she
          > rejected the concept of "Anatta" as an original teaching of Gotama
          > Buddha.
          >
          > I am just wondering whether she had done any writing describing why she
          > came to that conclusion.
          >
          >
          > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Augusta_Foley_Rhys_Davids
          >
        • Ong Yong Peng
          Dear Sumano, Chanida and Ruwan, let me remind everyone that such discussion can easily go out-of-topic. The concept of anatta is very profound and is unique
          Message 4 of 6 , Jul 31, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Dear Sumano, Chanida and Ruwan,

            let me remind everyone that such discussion can easily go
            out-of-topic. The concept of 'anatta' is very profound and is unique
            to Buddhadhamma. Not everyone can fully comprehend it, especially if a
            person has previously acquired some presuppositions. However, it is
            fine (in fact, more than fine) for someone not to fully understand
            'anatta'. It takes time, and is not a pure matter of faith.

            metta,
            Yong Peng.


            --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, paulocuana wrote:

            Mrs. Rys-Davids rejection of "anatta" is usually attributed to the
            loss of her young child.
            Apparently, she couldn't accept that there was no "soul" or something
            that continued on.

            > I am just wondering whether she had done any writing describing why
            > she came to that conclusion.
          • Chanida
            Dear Yong Peng, Thank you very much for reminding us about this. Metta, Chanida ... a ... why
            Message 5 of 6 , Jul 31, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Yong Peng,

              Thank you very much for reminding us about this.

              Metta,
              Chanida
              --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Ong Yong Peng" <pali.smith@...> wrote:
              >
              > Dear Sumano, Chanida and Ruwan,
              >
              > let me remind everyone that such discussion can easily go
              > out-of-topic. The concept of 'anatta' is very profound and is unique
              > to Buddhadhamma. Not everyone can fully comprehend it, especially if
              a
              > person has previously acquired some presuppositions. However, it is
              > fine (in fact, more than fine) for someone not to fully understand
              > 'anatta'. It takes time, and is not a pure matter of faith.
              >
              > metta,
              > Yong Peng.
              >
              >
              > --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, paulocuana wrote:
              >
              > Mrs. Rys-Davids rejection of "anatta" is usually attributed to the
              > loss of her young child.
              > Apparently, she couldn't accept that there was no "soul" or something
              > that continued on.
              >
              > > I am just wondering whether she had done any writing describing
              why
              > > she came to that conclusion.
              >
            • dipankaro
              Dear friends in the Dhamma, Regarding the anattaa whether sb is understood or not, we don t need to be care about that. No one can understand the concept of
              Message 6 of 6 , Aug 1, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear friends in the Dhamma,
                Regarding the 'anattaa' whether sb is understood or not, we don't need
                to be care about that. No one can understand the concept of 'anatta'
                unless he/she becomes an ariyan. Because, what is said 'anattaa' is
                the 'Nibbaana' which is not be understood mere by intellectual thinking
                and phiosophical investigations, as Mrs David attempted to do in one of
                her works.
                As one of our dhamma friend has pointed out that 'anattaa' is absolutely
                unique to the Buddhadhamma. Based on individual understanding some
                other misinterprets the Buddha's teachings. It is right to say that
                whatever way or however way the concept of 'anattaa' is inerpreted, it
                is totally unique to the Buddha's teachings as before him no one else
                had proclaimed so. And besides Buddhadhamma that concept does not
                exist in any other traditions, or religiuos systems.
                your's in the dhamma,
                dipankaro

                --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "Ong Yong Peng" <pali.smith@...> wrote:
                >
                > Dear Sumano, Chanida and Ruwan,
                >
                > let me remind everyone that such discussion can easily go
                > out-of-topic. The concept of 'anatta' is very profound and is unique
                > to Buddhadhamma. Not everyone can fully comprehend it, especially if
                a
                > person has previously acquired some presuppositions. However, it is
                > fine (in fact, more than fine) for someone not to fully understand
                > 'anatta'. It takes time, and is not a pure matter of faith.
                >
                > metta,
                > Yong Peng.
                >
                >
                > --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, paulocuana wrote:
                >
                > Mrs. Rys-Davids rejection of "anatta" is usually attributed to the
                > loss of her young child.
                > Apparently, she couldn't accept that there was no "soul" or something
                > that continued on.
                >
                > > I am just wondering whether she had done any writing describing
                why
                > > she came to that conclusion.
                >
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.