-THE
ONLY WEBSITE DEDICATED TO ORIGINAL
BUDDHISM-
THE
LARGEST INTERNET SITE FOR TEXTS ON BUDDHISM, NEOPLATONISM AND ADVAITA
NOW,
ALSO THE LARGEST SITE ON THE INTERNET FOR TEXTS ON NEOPLATONISM AND EMANATIONISM
(anatmanas tu satrutve vartetatmaiva
satruvat) “The Spirit is at war with whatever
is not-Spirit (anatman)” [B.G. VI.VI]
“The
Soul (Attan) is ones True-Nature (Svabhava)” [Mahavagga-Att.
3.270]
Veritas
Lux Mea
"The
truth is my light"
"Wisdom is the Soul, is Brahman
become"
"My
Soul is my refuge, none other exists"
“The
create is sacrificed (consumed in the fires) to the uncreate. This is the
meaning of (the word) Jhana (i.e. samadhi)”
[Pati 1.70]
"The
Lord, the Buddha, is That (Brahman) which makes Brahman-wheel (Brahmacakka)
move (unmoved Mover, Atman)" [Itivuttaka
#123]
"The Soul
is having become-Brahman" [MN
1.341]
“The Buddha is
a teacher of non-dualism (advayavadin [i.e. Advaita])”[Mahavyutpatti;
23: Divyavadaana. 95.13]
Buddhism before Theravada existed, Buddhism before Mahayana existed,
Buddhism before Vajrayana existed. Before all schisms were.
The only internet site
where citations and philosophy supercede opinions, speculation and sectarian
dogma.
This internet site is
in honorable memory of the renowned Buddhologists and scholars:
Dr.
C.A.F. Rhys Davids, George Grimm, S. Radhakrishnan, J. Perez-Ramon, G.C.
Pande, I.B. Horner, Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy, Julius Evola, Rene Guenon, Nikhilananda,
Chandradhar Sharma, Dr. Nakamura and many others;
all of whom denied to a greater or lesser degree the image and teachings
of modern Buddhism as being contrary to the original article.
“I am the Light, thyself,
and come to thee as such. Who thou art, that am I; and who I am, thou art;
come in.”
THE PREMISE OF ATTAN.COM
This
website is dedicated to original Buddhism and the gnosis advocated thereof,
as such it is an Anti-Guru, Anti-Zen-Master, Anti-Lama, Anti-Rimpoche,
and Anti-bhikkhu site adverse and hostile to any and all forms of superficial
spiritual-materialism, relativistic secular-Humanism, petty ritualisms,
and the New-Age movement as such. The liberation advocated by original
Buddhism has no connection to either a monastic clergy
[SN
5.410], or a guru-based dogma [DN
2.158], [DN 2.134], [MN 1.337].
-THE
SUMMATION OF BUDDHISM-| “What
is the one benefit, Master Gotama, which you exist for? The one thing that
the Tathagata exists for is the fruit and emancipation by illumination.”
[SN
5.73]
"Followers, this body is to be seen as it really is, it is merely (the product of) past karma (i.e. the body/5-aggregates cannot be purified)." [SN 2.65] “The Aryan Eightfold Path is the path leading to immortality” [SN 5.8] "The Tathagata, the Buddha, is a designation for (means) 'become-Brahman'."[DN 2.84] "The well-centered mind/will (citta) is the path for attainment of Brahman." [SN 4.118] “This is immortality, that being the liberated mind/will (citta) which does not cling (after anything)” [MN 2.265] “This said: ‘the liberated mind/will (citta) which does not cling’ means Nibbana”[MN2-Att. 4.68] "Steadfast-in-the-Soul (thitattoti) means one is supremely-fixed within the mind/will (citta)”[Silakkhandhavagga-Att. 1.168] “Your mind/will (citta) is supremely emancipated, like the full moon on the fifteenth day in dark of night!”[SN 1.233] The single most philosophically
important passage in all buddhist doctrine [MN 1.436]:
“Attained the steadfast Soul,
their mind/will (citta) is calm; they’re cleansed of the entire world,
taintless they have become Brahman” [SN
3.83]
Picture of the Urn containing (some of) the remains of the historical Gotama Buddha. www exclusive |
|
-THE
SWASTIKA IN BUDDHIST ICONOGRAPHY-
Buddhist crucifix 
the holy swastika
GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION MAP OF WHERE ANCIENT ICONOGRAPHY WAS FOUND BEARING THE MARK OF A SWASTIKA The true meaning of the swastika, the symbol of Emanationism, the ancient and only true religion The swastika, now incorrectly seen to mean “good luck” (pathetic corruption of meaning), or worse still, only associated with the fascist stooge Nazis, originally was the ‘swirl’ symbol which implied what Plato called the “Good”, the “One”; not a sentient self-aware Judeo-Christian/Muslim God, and certainly not anything associated with the atheistic/nihilistic evolution principle of materialism, but Emanationism, the most ancient and only true religion, which is opposite to BOTH Evolution(ism) and Creationism. Sadly and rather pathetically, there exists not even one book today written on the only true religion as taught by original Buddhism/Vedanta/Neoplatonism, that being Emanationism! The swastika in fact is the symbolic representation of the "God" of Emanationism, the religion/philosophy of Plato, Plotinus, the Upanishads, the historical Buddha, Proclus, Albinus, and, according the writings of ancient Greek Platonist Iamblichus, the religion of the Pythagoreans. -Webmaster attan.com  A
www exclusive book: "The Swastika" by Thomas Wilson (14.8MB PDF) Its relevance
in art and its symbolic meaning, 308 pages
-[Amaravati
India, 1st century BC (line copies of the stone carvings)] *PICTURE
OF SWASTIKA ON BUDDHIST ICONOGRAPHY*
"Buddhapada" (footprints of the Buddha) showing swastikas (pali: sotthi) and the brahmacakka (wheel of Brahman, thousand-spoked). In oldest Buddhist sutta, the swastika is the symbol for the Soul, and in the iconography of the above "Buddhapada", represents metaphorically "to be stationed in (stand) in the Soul (thitatta [Tikanipa’ta-Att. 3.4])", the brahmacakka being that which the Soul is like unto [MN 1.341]. See article below.   
INSCRIPTION ON ANCIENT NORWEGIAN SWORD BLADE, IN TRANSLATION: "OH THORMUTH" "[THIS SWORD] BELONGS TO THORMUTH"
  |
 What
is Original Buddhism?
Original Buddhism is Buddhasasana (doctrine of the Buddha) which predates all revisionist sects such as Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana, Zen, and other radical hybrids which, while proclaiming to teach Buddhism, are very far indeed from the methodology illumined in the Nikayas (scriptures) of Buddhism for finding immortality. Contrary to modern misunderstanding, Buddhism never denied Vedic nor Upanishadic philosophy; in fact, the historical Buddha praised the Vedas numberless times in Sutta [Ud-A #55; Ud #3]. It is commonly misunderstood that the Nikayas 'belong to the Theravada tipitaka', however this is completely inaccurate as most experts will testify to, for Theravada itself did not exist prior to the 2nd century A.D. nor are the Nikayas, Vinaya (many versions), and Abhidhamma (numberless versions which post date the Nikayas by many centuries) homogenous works; and as G.C. Pande and others elucidate “The major portion of the Nikayas appear to have certainly existed in the 4th century B.C.E.” [Studies in the Origins of Buddhism p.15]. The only presectarian corpus of Buddhism exists within the ancient scriptures of the Pali Nikayas and are, unquestionably, the oldest group of materials that exist which can illuminate for us that which the historical Gotama Buddha did or did not teach and his philosophical system culminating in emancipation and immortality. Both the Vinaya and the Abhidhamma are post-Buddhistic creations by sectarian monastic "Buddhism", which have no bearing nor connection to either Buddhism or its philosophical system of liberation. The more superficially one studies Buddhism, the more it seems to differ from the Brahmanism in which it originated; the more profound our study, the more difficult it becomes to distinguish Buddhism from Brahmanism, or to say in what respects, if any, Buddhism is really unorthodox. At the time frame of the historical Buddha Sakyamuni, Vedic methodology had become a corrupt system of rites and petty ritualism (eerily reminiscent of modern ‘Buddhism’ today), such as: “the Buddha is critical of the two dead ends in which he takes the Brahmins to have excessive indulgence in the pleasures of the senses, and excessive asceticism; both of which diverge from the old true Vedic ideal of the rishis of few wants. The true brahmin is that which the Buddha clearly approves of, such that he proclaims his Arahants to be the ‘true brahmins” [DN 1.167; Ud. 3, 4, 6, 29; Sn 612,656, 284-306; Dhp. 383,423]. Buddhism, as are the Upanishads, a means of emancipation (vimutta) from samsara (transmigration) through the perfection of wisdom and making the will/mind (citta) self-assimilated, therein being established in one's Soul [DN2-Att. 2.479]. Modernity, in refutation to Buddhism, has inverted the teachings of Buddhism to imply that mere superficial compassion, secular morality, and merit-making are the core of Buddhism [this superficial view of the path is denied at MN 3.72], and that Buddhism denies empirically the notion of autonomous stasis, i.e. the Soul, the Subjective and ontological nexus of noetic being. There are only two absolutes in Buddhism: “Emancipation of mind (cittavimutti) and emancipation by wisdom (pannavimutti), this is a designation for both ways liberated” [DN 2.71]; emancipation of mind achieved through Jhanic Samadhi, and emancipation by wisdom achieved through transmundane gnosis thereby eliminating avijja (nescience/agnosis/ignorance) which is the impetus for perpetual transmigration and the very root of suffering itself. Having achieved these two is deemed amata [immortality SN 5.8] and “emancipated in the Soul” [SN 3.54]. Logically one surely would ask, "why then is there a need for Buddhism, if in fact it is true that Buddhism in no way treads contrary to the Vedas or the Upanishads"? Firstly, Buddhism is to Vedanta, as Plotinus is to Plato, that being that Buddhism is highly more condensed philosophically, infinitely less verbose, and is not, generally, steeped in highly complex mytho-poetic metaphor that only supreme experts of Vedanta and sanskrit are able to see clearly through to realize content. Secondly, Buddhism, as the sramananic movement it was, sought to deprive from the select ‘elite’ of 500 B.C.E. Vedic masters, that hidden means which kept those who were “intelligently ripe”, and desired emancipation from samsara, from achieving that same goal without having to pass through a convoluted maze of pomposity, rite, and unobtainable prestige required to sit at the foot of him who would illuminate the path to immortality. In saying this, it must be pointed out that Buddhism was never an ‘everyman’s religion’, for as Gotama himself said, his teachings were for but those of “little dust in their eyes” [MN 1.168], however there were those Aryan-minded few who were “wasting away from lack of hearing the teachings”, and to them he was inclined to instruct the ancient path leading from mortality to immortality. “I have seen” says the Buddha, “the ancient path, the old road, which was tread upon by the illumined Brahmins of old, that is the path I follow. Just like an over covered path lost long ago is that which I have rediscovered” [SN 2.106]. As it happens, the only thing denied in oldest doctrine by the historical Buddha was that one was a "Brahmin by birth" (Brahmabandhu), rather than a "Brahmin by gnosis" (Brahmavit). The untaught, average man, when the end is at hand, "mourns, pines, weeps and wails"; but not so the Aryan disciple in whom the fires of selfhood (corporeal) have been quenched he knows that death is the inevitable end of all born beings and having made "the Soul his refuge" [DN 2.100], and taking this fate of the body for granted, only considers, "How shall I best apply my strength to what's at hand?" [A., III. 56] until he dies. Having already died to whatever can die ("a dead man walking"), he awaits the dissolution of the temporal vehicle with perfect composure and can say: "I hanker not for life, and am not impatient for death. I await the hour, like a servant expecting his wages; I shall lay down this body of mine at last, foreknowing, recollected" [Th., I. 606, 1002]. Or even if the Aryan disciple, whether a mendicant or still a householder, has not yet "done all that there was to be done," he is assured that having come into being elsewhere according to his deserts, it will still be possible for him to work out his perfection there. The words, "O grave, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?" might well have been the Buddha's or those of any true Buddhist. For him, there will be no more becoming, no more sorrow; or if there is, it will not be for long, for he has already gone far on that long road that leads to Nirvana, "and, indeed, he will soon have reached the goal." As the oldest texts of Buddhism say, wherein Lord Gotama called his path: "Brahmayana (path to Brahman/the Absolute)" [SN 5.5]. "And what, followers, is ‘Brahminhood’? It is our Aryan Eightfold Path" [SN 5.25]. "How is one a Brahman, is deemed crossed over, and gone beyond? Herein him, whose mind (citta) is freed, devoid of defilements, is liberated by wisdom. Such a one is a Brahman, is deemed crossed over, and gone beyond" [AN 2.6]. "The peoples say that Gotama is the supreme teacher of the way leading to the union with Brahman.” [DN 1.248] "The Tathagata, the Buddha, is a designation for (means) 'become-Brahman'." [DN 2.84] "The well-centered mind/will (citta) is the path for attainment of Brahman."[SN 4.118] EMANATIONISM.
The one true religion, The meaning behind the doctrine of Buddhism, of
Vedanta, and of Neoplatonism. The opposite religion of both Atheism/Nihilism/Evolution,
and of Judeo-Christian/Muslim Creationism
*A MUST READ!! Against no-Soul theories of Anatta in PDF (187 KB)*
The Living Thoughts of Gotama the Buddha by Dr. A.K. Comaraswamy Doctrine of the Buddha by George Grimm Studies in the Origins of Buddhism by G.C. Pande Sakya or Buddhist Origins by Dr. C.A.F. Rhys Davids (and other books by same author) The Doctrine of Awakening by Julius Evola Indian Buddhism by Dr. Nakamura Divine Revelation in Pali Buddhism by Peter Masefield Self & Non-Self in Early Buddhism by Perez-Ramon The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy by C. Sharma Indian Philosophy by Dr. S. Radhakrishnan The
Source for original/oldest Buddhism
[Studies in the Origins of Buddhism. Govind Pande Chandre; Motilal publishers ISBN 8120810163 1999] -"It follows that only the Nikayas go back to a period which predate the formation of Buddhist sects, which is important in discerning doctrinal matters." [page 12] -"Also it is of great note that from the standpoint of doctrinal evolution, that the stage of thought as reflected in sectarian controversies is much later that the formation and recording of the nikayas." [page 13] -"Only the Nikayas thusly, reflect the first and earliest period of the history of Buddhist thought when the Sangha was in doctrine at one." [page 13] - "Since only the Nikayas make no note of the massive schisms within the Buddhist Sangha, this is further evidence that it is only the Nikayas themselves that predate all sectarian divisions within the Buddhist Sangha." [page 16] -"The Nikayas would have to be placed as having been recorded no later than the first half of the 4th century B.C." [page 13] -“The vast majority of the Nikayas appear to have existed in record no later then 460 B.C." [page 14] -"An examination of the Sanchi inscriptions [one of Buddha’s stupas], show that some time before the early 4th century B.C. there was already a well established collection of Buddhist sermons of the Nikayas." [page 14] |
|
Winner of: *The Metaphysics Book of the Decade* is awarded to: 
(CLICK ON IMAGE OF BOOK ABOVE FOR A DIRRECT LINK TO AMAZON.COM FOR PURCHASE OF THIS BOOK) THE SHAPE OF ANCIENT THOUGHT By: Thomas McEvilley As the author explains it, "The records of caravan routes are like the philosophical stemmata of history, the trails of oral discourses moving through communities, of texts copied from texts. . . .What they reveal is not a structure of parallel straight lines—one labeled ‘Greece,’ another ‘Persia,’ another ‘India’—but a tangled web in which an element in one culture often leads to elements in others." While scholars have sensed a philosophical kinship between Eastern and Western cultures for many decades, THE SHAPE OF ANCIENT THOUGHT is the first study to provide the empirical evidence. Covering a period ranging from 600 B.C. until the era of Neoplatonism and a geographical expanse reaching across the ancient world, McEvilley explores the key philosophical paradigms of these cultures, such as Monism, the doctrine of reincarnation in India and Egypt, and early Pluralism in Greece and India, to reveal striking similarities between the two metaphysical systems. Based on 30 years of intense intellectual inquiry and research and on hundreds of early historical, philosophical, spiritual, and Buddhist texts, the study offers a scope and an interdisciplinary perspective that has no equal in the scholarly world. With a study like THE SHAPE OF ANCIENT THOUGHT, students and scholars of history, philosophy, cultural studies, and classics will find that their field has been put on entirely new footing. Yet as editor Bill Beckley points out, the merits of this work reach into a broader social context: "More recently, events have leant an unexpected urgency to the [book] by focusing the world’s attention on Afghanistan (ancient Bactria), where much of the story unfolds in this volume, and where the difficult karma of cross-cultural contacts is still alive." With The Shape of Ancient Thought Professor McEvilley has lowered a sturdy bucket into our Western well and invites us on a philosophical journey into one of these unexplored lands: Ancient India -- discussing the relationships and possible cross-cultural influences between early Western (i.e., Greek and Roman) philosophies and those of India. Ch. 1. Diffusion Channels in the Pre-Alexandrian Period Ch. 2. The Problem of the One and the Many Ch. 3. The Cosmic Cycle Ch. 4. The Doctrine of Reincarnation Ch. 5. Platonic Monism and Indian Thought Ch. 6. Platonic Ethics and Indian Yoga Ch. 7. Plato, Orphics, and Jains [Jainism = Jyainaa kyo, Jinakyo] Ch. 8. Plato and Kundalini Ch. 9. Cynics and Pasupatas Ch. 10. Five Questions Concerning the Ancient Near East Ch. 11. The Elements Ch. 12. Early Pluralisms in Greece and India Ch. 13. Skepticism, Empiricism, and Naturalism Ch. 14. Diffusion Channels in the Hellenistic and Roman Periods Ch. 15. Dialectic before Alexander Ch. 16. Early Greek Philosophy and Madhyamika [Madhyamika = Chuganha] Ch. 17. Pyrrhonism and Madhyamika [Pyrrhonism >> Scepticism] Ch. 18. The Path of the Dialectic [Nagarjuna = Ryuju] Ch. 19. The Syllogism Ch. 20. Peripatetics and Vaisesikas [Vaisesika = Vuaishieeshika gakuha] Ch. 21. The Stoics and Indian Thought Ch. 22. Neoplatonism and the Upanisadic-Vedantic Tradition Ch. 23. Plotinus and Vijnanavada Buddhism [Vijnanavada. See Yuishiki, Hosso] Ch. 24. Neoplatonism and Tantra [Tantra. See Mikkyo.] Ch. 25. The Ethics of Imperturbability Concluding Remarks. Then 5 appendices on the Aryans, the Aryan invasion, Black Athena and Western Xenophobia, the Golden Thigh, Philosophy and Grammar, followed by a List of Works Cited, and a 29-page Index. |
|
is awarded to: 
(CLICK ON IMAGE OF BOOKS ABOVE FOR A DIRRECT LINK TO AMAZON.COM AND PHANES PRESS FOR PURCHASE OF THESE BOOKS) Revolt Against the Modern World by: Julius Evola -&- The Theology of Arithmetic translated by: Robin Waterfield |
|
The 'secret' principle behind Emanationism (Monism, Platonism, original Buddhism, and Advaita Vedanta) Copyright 2006 Author: Webmaster attan.com  Avijja is literally meant Emanationism, the extrinsic attribute of the Absolute which is the indefinite dyad (aoristos dyas) for all creation, if the Absolute were devoid of an attribute, creation would be impossible, for even the most simplex of things have at least one attribute, the illumination of light and fluidity of water, for example (both attributes of a simplex principle). From the perspective of the Absolute, the very ‘stuff’ of will (citta/Brahman), there is no attribute, it is will utterly and only; as such the nature of the Absolute and its ‘act’ must be wholly indistinguishable, otherwise the presupposition of two subjects, the Absolute and X, would be posited and the very premise of Monism (Monism in meaning = 1 only) and of Emanationism would be utterly negated. Avijja is a compound term composed of the privative A (not, opposite to, other than, lack of) and VIJJA (Light, Soul, Atman, Brahman). The very nature of the Absolute (vijja), which is objectively directed (a) away from its very Subject (vijja/Brahman), which is also that very same nature of the Atman (“Atman is [of the nature of] Brahman”-Up, and Buddhism: ‘Brahmabhutena attano’). The confusion over avijja lies in the fact that it is both subjectively and objectively directed simultaneously. Avijja itself being the “light from itself (directed)” is meant that avijja has the Subjective (Self and Absolute) as its object, namely the concealment or privation (a) of the Subject (Atman) from itself. Avijja is objectification by its very definition, i.e. Emanationism. The object of avijja is the Absolute (the light, or vijja, from itself, a), meaning that the Subject, the Absolute, is self-objectifying, i.e. the very nature of will (citta,chit,Brahman) itself, being ‘to will’, not to itself, but to other. Avijja is itself objectification (by the Subject to other), but the very lack of (a) wisdom (vijja) in the will of a being is as pertains its nature, the Subject to which avijja is the very object of. Brahman is Atman, and Atman is of the nature of Brahman and in no doubt the very premise of both the Upanishads and of original Buddhism, the only differentiation between the two is Atman is devoid of the objectively directed attribute of Brahman, such that the Atman is self-reflexive and self-assimilative, i.e. completely dis-objectified =self-actualization,... the actualization (Atman) of what was before merely potential due to the objectively (avijja) directed nature of the Absolute. Atman is the actualization (by wisdom, self-assimilation) of Brahman which is sheer potential and unmediated (avijja). Just as one cannot differentiate light from its attribute (to illumine), neither can the nature of the Absolute be thought different or a separate entity from its attributive or extrinsic principle, that of self-objectification, that will wills (citta cetasa). Agnosis is Emanationism itself, the objectively directed “light” from itself to other. Avijja is not a thing itself, but a privation, the uncaused cause for all becoming (bhava). Unlike Creationism which posits a sentient all-aware Superbeing (God) as the principle (1st cause) behind the complexity we see in nature, Emanationism differs to the logic necessity of merely the extrinsic side of the nature of the Absolute as such that it is, by its very attribute, the “unmoved Mover” behind all things composite, phenomenal and noetic. Complexity in nature and the cosmos at large is in dispute by none, neither by Creationist, Nihilist, or Monist (Emanationist), only the nexus for said complexity is disputed. As pertains the Absolute, its nature and activity are inseparably one thing only, this is the long lost ‘secret’ behind avijja. There is no first cause behind the phenomenal cosmos nor for the spiritual, the noetic will(s) which encircle and underlies the visible world. With attribute as ‘cause’, all things are manifest as the artifice (maya) of the visible world we covet in ignorance (avijja). First cause necessitates an irreconcilable duality, which cannot be enjoined in Emanationism, that A: something other than the Absolute is cause for all things become, or that B: the Absolute is complex being (God) that chose and created the cosmos. The reconciliation of the ignorant proposition of a “first cause for all things become” is merely that of the attributive and extrinsic nature of the Absolute itself, avijja, or the will to other, the ‘lighting outwards of the nature of light itself’, or as is meant here, the Absolute, which is of the nature of will (citta). “Bhavanirodha nibbanam” (subjugation of becoming is meant Nirvana) is absolutely identical in meaning to “Yoga chita vritti nirodha” (Yoga [samadhi/assimilation] is the subjugation of the will’s [citta] turnings/ manifestations/ perturbations); as such becoming (bhava) and vritti (perturbations) are meant the inchoate nature of the will to objectively direct itself in perpetuity is the beginningless and the primordial principle of the Absolute to other. Overcoming the attributive privation of the Subject to have itself as an object (an impossibility) must be surmounted for liberation to occur such that the Subject has itself as object indirectly thru the via negativa methodology wherein the will ‘knows’ itself as ‘none of this’ and becoming is halted and Self-objectification ceases (nirodha). Avijja and anatta (Skt. Anatman) are interchangeable terms, the principle of the Absolute to objectification (a-vijja) is meant anatta, for what is other than the Atman, the Light/Vijja than all the 22 named phenomena which are not (a/an) the Soul (vijja/atman)? The finer distinction however between anatta and avijja is that anatta is the purely phenomenal manifestation of the ontological attribute of the Absolute, avijja. How can what does not exist in anyway be the cause for all things and namely for suffering itself? Surely as a man lost in a barren dessert suffers thirst by the non-existence of waters in said barren lands; so too does the Samsarin (person lost in samsara) suffer at the ‘hands’ of his will which is objectively (avijja) directed to the world of phenomena and sense pleasures, all of which are anatman and which is meant by the very term avijja, for avijja is the privation of illumination/revelation/ditthi in the being as relates to his very nature and true Self, of which the Atman is vijja. That his will (the very Self) is objectively (anatta) directed, instead of Subjectively assimilated (vijja, Atman), “therein does he suffer” -Gotama. Liberation via wisdom (vijjavimutta, i.e. pannavimutta) is the actualization of the light of the will upon itself (vijja) instead of, as primordially and without beginning from the Absolute, objectively (avijja) directed. Avidya (avijja Pali) has befuddled (and continues to do so) Vedantists now for thousands of years as witnessed to in lively debates we still have record of. Namely it was impossible for them to come to odds with the nature of avidya, such that “how can what is mere privation (lack of gnosis, avidya) be the cause for all things? Was Avidya real or unreal? Was it both or neither? What is the locus of avijja? Is it the Absolute, or the Atman, or the mere (phenomenal) self, or neither, or both?” None of these questions are tenable, for avijja is not a thing in itself, but the principle of the Absolute, the primordial principle antecedent to being, or the empirical principle of avijja as manifest in the composite being. What would the locus of a shadow, the privation of light, be? Certainly we can point to X shadow, but that cannot be the locus of avijja, for something precedes the shadow, so would it be that which casts the shadow? No, for that shape which casts the shadow is preceded by the light which is blocked by that shape. The shadow belongs neither to the form nor the light, but is the objective construct of both. Avijja is subjectively directed and objectively manifest. Since avijja is merely the extrinsic and Subjective attribute of the will (willing to other [object] = avijja), there is no locus for avijja, for if one were to say: “avijja is the attributive principle of the Absolute, therefore avijja’s locus is the Absolute/Brahman”, this is a nonsensical statement since the locus for illumination (avijja) as pertains light, is also unanswerable since neither the object of illumination, nor the light itself is the locus of illumination. Avijja is act, nature and necessity of the Absolute, all three, for its as impossible to separate illumination from light as to separate willing from will, or avijja from vijja, for avijja implies vijja, just as anatta implies the attan! Would so the fool speak of avijja or anatta without attempting to (in negative dialectics) point to the vijja, the attan (Atman. Skt.)? Avijja has no meaning outside the conjunct of will and matter, the empirical consciousness (vinnana). The very nature of the Light (vijja) is its outwardly principle to illumine (avijja), principle nor privation have a locus. The Absolute, or Brahman is most certainly vijja, simplex in every way, so to proclaim that the locus of avijja is “in the Absolute” would be both untrue but also illogical. Light (vijja) and illumination (avijja) are inseparably one thing only; this is the indefinite dyad (aoristos dyas) of the ancient Greek Platonists. Specifically ancient Pali is revealing, for the very word for consciousness, vinnana, is literally meant agnosis (avijja): vi (opposite to, contrary of, other than) + ñana (gnosis, vijja, Knowledge, Light, Atman, Brahman), i.e. Vi+nana (vinnana). For the “unknowing” (vinnana), the consciousness of being is the resultant manifestation directly attributive to the Absolute and its very extrinsic nature. As pertains Buddhism specifically, avijja is the first position in the chain of contingent manifestation (paticcasamuppada), however one need ask: “agnosis (avijja) OF what and BY what”? Ignorance itself is not a thing, but an attribution of something, be it in one of two modalities, primordial agnosis (avijja), or empirical agnosis. Samyutta 2.4 specifically (as well as countless other passages) equate avijja with agnosis (anana): [Katama ca, bhikkhave, avijja? yam kho, bhikkhave, dukkhe aññanam”]. Two entirely different levels of agnosis are at play in the model of being, one being the primordial agnosis which is beginningless, and the agnosis which is willed by a being from second to second, as pertains his will (citta), be it by wisdom or lack thereof ; ignorance is manifest which either perpetuates becoming (bhava) and actions (karma), or wisdom in its place which subjugates (nirodha) them; specifically [SN 5.127] speaks of the empirical side of agnosis in the being who so wills them at the discretion of his (level of) ignorance. “As above, so below” this is true of the Absolute that primordial agnosis is the higher principle behind empirical agnosis as manifest in being. The self-privative avijja of the nature of the Absolute that it is subjectively directed inwards, and the empirical ‘shadow’ of the being who marvels in the logos of Emanation as cast by the Absolute, but is unknowing (avijja) as to the Subjective “light” of which he is by nature which is also identical to the Absolute itself, being will (citta). Entirely in line with Platonism, Buddhism proclaims: [AN 5.113] “Followers, the beginning of ignorance can never be discerned (beginningless) such that it cannot be said “Here is the First where ignorance is not, here is the contingency which generated it.” Such that it should be discerned, followers, “ignorance is a condition” (Purima, bhikkhave, koti na pañña’yati avijja’ya– ‘ito pubbe avijja’ na’hosi, atha paccha’ samabhavi’’ti. Evañcetam, bhikkhave, vuccati, atha ca pana pañña’yati– ‘idappaccaya’ avijja’’ti.). In Buddhist sutta, avijja is forerunner, as it should be, being first in paticcasamuppada: [AN 2.12] “Above karma, becoming, and views, ‘agnosis encircles (all of them)’ as the (source for) samsara.” (“Ka’mayogena samyutta’, bhavayogena cu’bhayam; ditthiyogena samyutta’, avijja’ya purakkhata’”). Also: [SN-Att. 1.236] Nanajotim (the light of gnosis) = atman; meaning that the wisdom (vijja) made manifest in the disciple is the very premise for liberation as such that agnosis (avijja) has been cut off = end of Self-objectification (avijja, also = atta-an, i.e. anatta). In fact, in Buddhist doctrine the only noun “freed” of avijja is the citta, which logically presupposes the fact that as pertains our earlier question: “agnosis (avijja) OF what and BY what”? , must be meant avijja of the will’s nature (atman) by the will (citta): [AN 1.196] "With mind (citta) emancipated from ignorance (avijja)…this designates the Soul is having become-Brahman.", [AN 1.195] “Citta is freed of the sensuous taint, citta is freed of the taint of becoming (bhavaasavaapi), citta is freed of the taint of nescience/ignorance (avijja), Liberation! Gnosis is this, therein (utter) liberation.” [MN 1.279] “When his steadfast mind was perfectly purified, perfectly illumined, stainless, utterly perfect, pliable, sturdy, fixed, and everlastingly determinate then he directs his mind towards the gnosis of the destruction of defilements. Knowing thus and seeing thus his mind is emancipated from sensual desires, his mind is emancipated from becoming, his mind is emancipated from ignorance.” “This said: ‘the liberated mind/will (citta) which does not cling’ means Nibbana”[MN2-Att. 4.68]. "Steadfast-in-the-Soul (thitattoti) means one is supremely-fixed within the mind/will (citta)”[Silakkhandhavagga-Att. 1.168]. “'The purification of one’s own mind/will', this means the light (joti) within one’s mind/will (citta) is the very Soul (attano)” [DN2-Att. 2.479]. |
|
Or, the empirical self (namo-rupa, anatta), and the Spiritual (attan) Self Copyright 2007 Author: Webmaster attan.com *A MUST READ!! Against
no-Soul theories of Anatta in PDF (187 KB)*
What has Buddhism to say of the Self? "That's not my Self" (na me so atta); and the term "non Self-ishness" (anatta) are predicated of the world and all "things" (sabbe dhamma anatta); identical with the Brahmanical "of those who are mortal, there is no Self/Soul", (anatma hi martyah), [SB., II. 2. 2. 3]). [KN J-1441] “The Soul is the refuge that I have gone unto”. For anatta is not said of the Self/Soul but what it is not. There is never a ‘doctrine of no-Soul’, but a doctrine of what the Soul (The Self) is not (form is anatta, feelings are anatta, etc.). It cannot be denied that what is anatta is indeed the mere and petty self for [SN 3.196], and countless other passages, the mere self of psycho-physicality is = anatta = khandhas; that same self which the disciple is instructed to have his will (ctta) reject in the face of illumination and insight. Of the Metaphysician, the common-fool (puthujjana) who knows “only of his self, is fated to most certainly die when his time comes”, but of that noble Aryan sage who has claimed the summit of wisdom and is “freed the will/nous (cittavimuttati)”, he is a “dead man walking”; meaning he has “died to that mere self and lives in The Self”. Such a person in quest for same is commanded “die before ye die!”, or that before physical death come and lest you still suffer the delusion of The Self to be this (foul) self of flesh and bone you have dispirited and disobjectified the will (Self-assimilation = Atman) in upon itself (samadhi, liberation). The common fool who ruminates over immortality envisages the survival of the personality (of person so-and-so; Bob, Sue); confusing the empirical self of “flesh, urine, blood, bone, feces” [Dhm] with the Spirit (atman). This empirical self is in doubt by none, that very same self “headed to the grave” and which “goes in its own time”. The Metaphysician knows that any ‘self’ created in time must also perish in those same (“fires of”) time. [Dhm. 147] "Behold! That painted puppet this body, riddled with oozing sores, an erected façade. Diseased heap that fools fancy and swoon over”; of which Buddhism in no way quarrels with modern and corrupt ‘Buddhism’, that of which this very self, the temporal phenomena of that person so-and-so is equally as much ‘dukkha, anicca, and anatta”. The ‘reflexive position’ taken by illogical modern ‘Buddhism’ proclaims the Pali term Attan (Skt. Atman, Self) to be merely a reflexive term meaning “oneself, himself, herself”, however the reflexive and empirical mere self is, regardless of translation, “anatta” i.e. “na me so atta” (not my Soul), or also “eso khandhassa na me so atta” (these aggregates [forms, feelings, perceptions, experiences, consciousness =mere self] are no the Self, the Soul). As pertains the reflexive self, of who proclaim “myself, himself, herself” we are referring to “that person so-and-so (Larry, Sue, etc.)”, the empirical and psycho-physical (namo-rupa) self of blood and sinew which is “doomed to fall into the grave at long last”, the very same self the poetic dead are said to cry out to the living “what you are, we (the dead) once were,. what we are you shall be!”. Even more illogical is the double standard of commentarialist and sectarian ‘Buddhists’ who desire anatta to mean ‘no-Soul’ as well as atta to mean simply ‘myself, himself, herself’; wherein illogically atta in the adjective anatta is, to their ignorant minds = Soul (‘no-soul’), but atta in standalone = ‘myself’. As illogical an end result, modern Buddhism has proclaimed atta = anatta! Its quite hard to fathom any position more senseless than this, however this is one of the countless reasons modern ‘Buddhism’ is illogical without end. However doctrinally and logically so, what IS anatta (the five psycho-physical aggregates of the mere self) are indeed ‘myself’, in so meaning the mortal (mata) self composed of the bodily humors which is fated to death. That mere self is never implied nor meant when Buddhism speaks of immortality and the path leading to same (amatagamimagga) [SN 5.9], of which “the body cannot pass that gate to fare beyond,..only the Soul (The Self)” - Homer The great dictum of the Upanishads is “That (Brahman) thou art” (tat tvam asi). “That” is here, of course, the Atman or Spirit, Sanctus Spiritus, the Greek pneuma; this Atman is the spiritual essence, impartite whether transcendent or immanent; and however many and various directions to which it may extend or from which it may withdraw, it is the unmoved mover in both intransitive and transitive senses. It lends itself to all modalities of being but never itself becomes anyone or anything. That than which all else is vexation- That thou art. “That”, in other words, is Brahman, or Godhead in the general sense of Logos or Being, considered as the universal source of all Being. That which is “in” him as the finite (1) in the infinite (2-infinity, i.e. phenomena, namo-rupa), though not a “part” of him. Referring back to "of those who are mortal, there is no Self/Soul", the common fool doesn’t 'have' an atman as such that we might agree with heretical modern ‘Buddhism’ which denies Selfhood in the absolute; for those same peoples who, in the grand bloom of ignorance, accept the foul self and deny the Great-Self, they are objectively (self-khandhas) assured that no underlying Subject (The Self) is immanent, or transcendent. Just as a man might have gold on his land, undiscovered and unknown, he has no gold, no wealth, even though it be his by measure of being present upon his very lands; so too those common fools (puthujjana), the ‘Buddhists’ who are certain and proud in their ignorance that this temporal personality, this self, is all there is. Theravada, in great illogic, goes one further to say that Gotama’s denial of nihilism (ucchedavada) was aimed at meaning that even the empirical self, since it itself was merely a composite and temporal construct, had no existence to be annihilated; thereby subverting the doctrinal ‘heresy of nihilism’ to be placed upon the view of denying the empirical self rather than The Self, the Atman. Of course, to ‘have an atman’ implies possession, and certainly so the immanent Subject, The Self, is a possession by nothing and by nobody; in this too the wiseman agrees with the common materialist who ignorantly proclaims “I don’t have an atman/Soul”, most certainly that foul self does not ‘have’ The Self any more so than that object which is illuminated from afar ‘has (of itself) light’. “There are two within us” [Plato’s Republic 439d, 604b]; in the expression of “self-control” implying that there is one that controls and the other (self) subject to control, for we know that “nothing acts upon itself”; for the one self “becomes”, and the other self “is”. “The ‘fair’ self (kalyanam attanam)…the ‘foul’ self (papam attanam)” [AN 1.149]; i.e. the “great Self” (mahatta) and the “petty” (appatumo) [AN 1.249], or that “self whose Lord is the Self” [Dhm 380]. In that modern so-called Buddhism has denied The Self, it has constructed an illogical impossibility in thereby positing empirical purity of which the doctrine of Buddhism itself, not to mention logic alone most heartily protests, for there is no possibility of empirical purity within the teachings of Buddhism. It is of course true that the Buddha denied the existence of the mere empirical “self” in the very meaning of “my-self” (this person so-and-so, namo-rupa, an-atta), one might say in accordance with the command ‘denegat seipsum, [Mark VII.34]; but this is not what modern so-called Buddhism means to say, or are understood by their readers to say; what they mean to say is that the Buddha denied the immortal (amata), the unborn (ajata) and Supreme-Self (mahatta’) of the Upanishads. And that is palpably false, for he frequently speaks of this Self, or Spirit (mahapurisha), and nowhere more clearly than in the too often repeated formula 'na me so atta’, “This/these are not my Soul” (na me so atta’= anatta/anatman), excluding body (rupa) and the components of empirical consciousness (vinnana/ nama). "What of this short-lived body which is clung to by means of craving? There is nothing in it to say ‘I’ or ‘mine’ or ‘me’." [MN 1.185]. "What do you suppose, followers, if people were carrying off into the Jeta grove bunches of sticks, grasses, branches, and leaves and did with them as they wished or burned them up, would it occur to you: These people are carrying us off, are doing as they please with us, and are burning us? No, indeed not Lord. And how so? Because Lord, none of that is our Soul." [MN 1.141]. “What do you think, is form lasting or impermanent? Impermanent Gotama. Is that which is impermanent suffering or blissful? Indeed its suffering Gotama. Is that which is impermanent and suffering and subject to perpetual change; is it fit to declare of such things ‘this is mine, this is what I am, this is my Soul? Indeed not Gotama!” [MN 1.232]. Buddhism’s command, same as that of Plotinus and the Pythagoreans before him, was the utter disobjectification of the will by inversion of that primordial attribute which is uncaused and without beginning (attribute/avijja). For only the wise and illuminated fully know the two selves, differentiate the two by means of wisdom with which they are endowed, and certainly do not see “Self in what is (mere) self (anatta)”. |
|
Correcting one of the many lies of modern ‘Buddhism’ Copyright 2007 Webmaster of attan.com The term Tathagata is composed of two parts, Tat, and agata. Tat has been since time immemorial in India, meant Brahman, the Absolute, as in the famous Upanishadic dictum: “That (Brahman) thou art” (tat tvam asi). “That” is here, of course Brahman, the Godhead, the Subject of Selfhood which the muni, or sage, has reached at the pinnacle of his having fulfilled wisdom’s perfection. Agata is the past tense denotation of gata (going, traveling, trekking), here being meant “arrival, gone-unto, attainment of, arrival-at”. As such, Tathagata in the ancient Prakrit Pali, is meant literally “(The sage who has) arrived at the Absolute”, or in Sramanic context of Vedanta and Buddhism, “(He-thou) is (arrived at) That”. The very term Tathagata, which has of yet never been discovered by anyone until now, is none other than a personal appellation of that very rare someone who has realized by wisdom “tat tvam asi”. The Tathagata, therefore, is equally as well meant “The ‘tat tvam asi’ comprehensor/sage”. It is unfathomable that modern so-called Buddhism’s position is that the spiritual appellation of the Buddha’s attainment, “attained/arrived at Brahman” (Tathagata) is merely an honorary designation for a popular sage. As [It 57] and other passages clearly show, “become-Brahman” is the meaning of the term Tathagata, or he who has arrived (agata), again being meant the transfiguration and assimilation of the mind (citta) in upon itself (bhava), and thereby achieving the Absolute, i.e. Brahman, as such (brahmabhutam tathagata) is said. To say that Tathagata, is meant by nonsensical “Buddhism”, to the effect: that Tathagata denotes the “thus-come one”, or “thus-gone one” has no contextual validity, is utterly illogical to read Pali as such, and carries no meaning whatsoever, which is all the more so magnified given that the very term Tathagata carries, regardless of translation, a very weighty importance and denotation; thereby secular ‘Buddhism’ intends to castrate the meaning of the term Tathagata, is yet another resection of original Buddhism by modern sects to turn Buddhism into a moralistic movement devoid of metaphysics. Scriptural collaboration of same: (Tathagatassa hetam, adhivacanam brahmabhuto itipi)-“The Tathagata means 'the body of Brahman', 'become Brahman'” [DN 3.84]. (brahmabhutam tathagata)-“Become-Brahman is the meaning of Tathagata” [It 57]. Many more such passages are preset in suttana. |
-RARE
AND COMPLETE BOOKS FOR DOWNLOAD ON BUDDHISM-
I
appreciate the permission by the son of Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy, Dr. Rama
P. Coomaraswamy, to put up some of the works of his father here on attan.com.
His kind permission is greatly admired and will serve to give his fathers
writings greater exposure for the genius they are.
METAPHYSICS
by Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this very rare book is the finest description of Indian Buddhism and Vedanta metaphysics ever written! All files below from the book Metaphysics, are the respective chapters, and are in Adobe PDF format. If you download just one book on this site, make this the one. The fact that this book is going for $250.00 used at online booksellers is some indication. An entire pantheon of famous authors and scholars in this field have praised “Metaphysics” by Dr. Coomaraswamy like no other. An absolutely exquisite work without any equal, and truly the crown jewel of books on Indian metaphysics. Bhakti Aspects of the Atman Doctrine (581KB) Vedic "Monotheism" (568KB) The Tantric Doctrine of Divine Biunity (541KB) The Vedanta and Western Tradition (1MB) The Meaning of Death (159KB) On the One and Only Transmigrant (1.07MB) Vedic Exemplarism (1.07MB) The Vedic Doctrine of "Silence"(608KB) Measure of Fire (337KB) Who is "Satan" and Where is "Hell"? (572KB) Kha and other words denoting "Zero"; Indian Metaphysics of Space (540KB) Manas (584KB) Maha Purisha: "Supreme Identity" (464KB) Atmayajna: Self-Sacrifice (2.03MB) Akimcana: Self-Naughting (1.13MB) Recollection, Indian and Platonic (885KB) Indian Traditional Psychology, or Rather Pneumatology (2.43MB) Ramakrishna and Religious tolerance (1.2MB) "Socrates is old" the meaning of words (2.2MB) Some Pali words (8.7MB) The Seventieth Birthday Address (314KB) Dante's Paradiso (1.95MB) The "E" at Delphi (460KB) The Flood in the Hindu Tradition (1.18MB) Lila (1MB) Nirukta (1MB) Play and Seriousness (427KB) 
Traditional
Art and Symbolism by Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this rare book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. Traditional Art and Symbolism (58.1 MB)
Time
and Eternity (Buddhism
section) by Dr. A.K.
Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this chapter on Buddhism is the best description of time and being in Buddhist doctrine. A must read! Buddhism Section of Time and Eternity (1.77MB)
GREEK Section of Time and Eternity (2.68 MB)
Elements
of Buddhist Iconography by Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format.
Pythagoras,
Plato and the Golden Ratio
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. Pythagoras, Plato and the Golden Ratio (2MB)
Hinduism
and Buddhism by Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format.
Am
I My Brothers Keeper? by Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this very rare book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format.
A
New Approach to the Vedas by Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. A New Approach to the Vedas (4.49MB)
Perception
of the Vedas by Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, a portion of this book for download. In Adobe PDF format. Perception of the Vedas (5.52MB)
The
Principle Upanishads by Dr. S. RadhakrishnanINTRODUCTION
TO THE LIFE AND WORKS OF RADHAKRISHNAN, EXPERT IN VEDANTA, FORMER PRESIDENT
OF INDIA.
SHORT
INTRODUCTION OF THE INTRO TO THE "PRINCIPLE UPANISHADS" BY RADHAKRISHNAN
Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad Kausitaki Brahmana Upanishad (1.47MB) Chandyoga Upanishad Maitri Upanishad Aitareya Upanishad (393KB) Subala Upanishad (1.13KB) Taittiriya Upanishad (1.27MB) Jabala Upanishad (238KB) Isa Upanishad (486KB) Paingala Upanishad (815KB) Kena Upanishad (489KB) Kaivalya Upanishad (196KB) Katha Upanishad (1.95MB) Vajrasucika Upanishad (196KB) Prasna Upanishad (686KB) Mandukya Upanishad (427KB) Mundaka Upanishad (789KB) Appendix (590KB)
Complete
Text of the Mahayana Mahaparnirvana Sutra in HTML (2.25 MB)
The entire text of the MPNS has been revised, edited by and copyright: Dr. Tony Page, who is webmaster of www.nirvanasutra.org.uk [Taisho T .374, trans. Dr. Kosho Yamamoto. Published 1973 Karibunko press. Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra] "All Sutras lead to the Mahaparinirvana Sutra"-MPS A WWW Exclusive on attan.com, the complete text, whole and entire! 336 Pages. |
The
Origin of the Buddha Image by Dr. A.K.
Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. The Origin of the Buddha Image (6.33MB) 
The
Living Thoughts of Gotama the Buddha by
Dr. A.K. Coomaraswamy
A www exclusive here on attan.com, the introduction of this book for download. In Adobe PDF format. Introduction of The Living Thoughts of Gotama the Buddha (1.64MB)
Buddhist
Wisdom by George Grimm
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. The famous Buddhist scholar Edward Conze commented on this book and the author saying: “The more I am convinced that George Grimm’s interpretation of the Buddhist theory of Atman (as light, as refuge) comes nearest to the original teachings of the historical Buddha.” This small book is a must read for anyone who wants to penetrate what the Buddha came to search for, which gave him final liberation from identity with phenomenal existence to a True ‘existence’ formerly hidden by ignorance.
Doctrine
of the Buddha by George Grimm
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. This book, “The Doctrine of the Buddha”, presents the old genuine Buddha-doctrine with the aim of developing a new type of man. It represents not only the flower of Indian religious feeling and philosophy but also the crowning summit of the authentic doctrine of the Buddha. The author in this work goes into great detail to explain to the reader the real meaning of the teaching upon the Atman by the historical Buddha in its oldest texts and reveal the original Self-affirming doctrine of light and wisdom which made Buddhism so beloved, and explains the true misunderstanding faced by modern Buddhists who missed the via negative (not this not that, anatman, ‘this is not my soul’) method so often used as a teaching tool by the Buddha to in fact point to, indirectly, to the everpresent Subject, the Self, the Soul which was in the Buddha’s dying words “the only refuge, the light, the lasting, that which must be sought above all else”. This book is an absolute must read for anyone formerly confused by pouring through profanely inaccurate descriptions upon Buddhism by less than intelligent commentators and unwise pundits who so often are publishing miserable little books under the title and topic of "Buddhism". A higher recommendation doesn’t exist than for this very book! A.P. Buddhadatta, the well known Sinhalese Pali scholar and head of the Aggarama at Ambalangoda in Ceylon (appointed as the Agga-Mahapandita at the Council of Rangoon) wrote on 4th March 1947 concerning the English edition of George Grimm's main work in a letter to his daughter:" I read that book [DOCTRINE OF THE BUDDHA by George Grimm] , and (found it to be) as you have stated in your letter that ‘he (Grimm) recovered of the old genuine doctrine of the Buddha which had been submerged'. When we (Theravada) read our Pali texts (Abhidhamma) and commentaries (Buddhaghosa, Vishudhamagga), we get the idea that Buddhism is a sort of Nihilism….Thus I was puzzled for a long time to understand the true meaning of Buddhism though I was born a Buddhist. Many peoples do not go so far in these matters (of doctrine)." Preface-Introduction (3.16MB) Section 3 (2.28MB) Section 1 (5.86MB) Section 4 (5.07MB) Section 2 (3.56MB) Appendix-Notes (2.12MB)
Sakya
or Buddhist Origins by Mrs. C.A.F. Rhys
Davids
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this extremely rare book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. Section 1 (8.98MB) Section 3 (4.26MB) Section 2 (6.65MB) Section 4 (5.45MB)
Study
of the Buddhist Norm by Mrs. C.A.F. Rhys
Davids
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this extremely rare book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. Study of the Buddhist Norm (33.2MB)
What
Was the Original Gospel in Buddhism? by
Mrs. C.A.F. Rhys Davids
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this extremely rare book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. What was the original gospel in Buddhism? (20.2MB)
Outlines
of Buddhism by Mrs. C.A.F. Rhys Davids
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this very rare book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. Outlines of Buddhism by Mrs. C.A.F. Rhys Davids (3.09MB)
Early
Buddhist Theory of Man Perfected by Mrs.
I.B. Horner
A www exclusive here on attan.com, this rare book in its entirety for download. In Adobe PDF format. Early Buddhist Theory of Man Perfected (48.4MB)
Introduction
of The Upanishads by Swami Nikhilananda
A www exclusive here on attan.com, the introduction of this book for download. In Adobe PDF format.
|
