The Buddha refused to answer the question of how many beings in the universe will attain Nibbana. Ananda gave a reply, though.
From AN 10.95 :
“And, Master Gotama, when having directly known it, you teach the Dhamma to your disciples for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding, will all the cosmos be led [to release], or a half of it, or a third?”
Yes, but it is infinite time. So either they are eventually going to reach nibbana, or they’re not. I thought about the infinite beginning and that’s difficult. I don’t know what the answer is, I’m just saying the explanation has to explain this. Even if, like you said, stream entry is very hard to reach (which I agree with), it is still infinite time, so either they eventually reach it or not. There’s nothing longer than infinite.
Thanks for the correction, you’re probably right that ‘without discoverable beginning’ is the proper formula!
My interpretation is that no matter how far the Buddha went back there was more past before that. If there was a beginning of time then of course we’d have a problem with anicca which would have then ‘started’ at some point. And that again would be the same as samkhya, wouldn’t it? That there was a stable uniform world in the beginning and then some cosmic catastrophe happened and then the gunas / qualities appeared and with it sankhara and anicca… That would be quite impossible for the EBT I think.
Yeah, “dependent origination” in the contemporary Mahayana and “consensus Buddhism” imaginarium seems to mean something quite different from what it means in the Pali-based tradition. It’s al about “Indra’s web” or something.
Right, although in some very small sense, it might be - oxygen and fuel for instance will be affected by gravity, and the moon definitely has mass and hence a gravitational pull…and I’m sure this is not the only influence/connection you could find here…When you start to think in this kind of way, seeing webs of connections and influences (butterfly effect type stuff) - certain ideas about “interdependence” make a great deal of sense. Dependent origination in the suttas seems more specific - it is about the origin of suffering.
Well, now, with those examples, we’re in the realm of objects, which is a different matter entirely, IMO.
If you wish, you can google “interdependent origination”, to find that it is just another English-language rendering of the same old word: pratītyasamutpāda.
To use metaphor again to illustrate a point that I think we all agree on, the problem isn’t the realm of objects, the fire, gravity, or the moon… it’s that we’re on fire with greed, hatred, and delusion. https://suttacentral.net/en/sn35.28
Ok, pratītyasamutpāda is Sanskrit not Pāli. No trusted Pāli scholar would render paṭicca samuppāda as interdependent origination. The dependence goes one way in arising, and the same way in ceasing; in other words the chain is unidirectional, the inter- prefix betrays the concept.
Well, at the very least, the Venerable Dhamma Sāmi I suppose might disagree with you as to if “interdependent origination” is a suitable rendering of paṭiccasamuppāda (at least as much as his website indicates) since there is no real difference in meaning between the Sanskrit pratītyasamutpāda & and Pāli paṭiccasamuppāda, as testified to by the various Sanskrit EBTs hosted on this site. Similarly, there is no difference between the pratītyasamutpāda or the paṭiccasamuppāda that the terms “interdependent origination” and “dependent origination” are translating.
Certainly, though, “interdependent origination” is a far less common English rendering than “dependent origination”. But either way, it means the same thing.
I recommend reading Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations.
If I attain enlightenment, it’s due to innumerable causes and conditions that made it possible, including those who taught and helped me along the way. Innumerable other beings will then be helped by me in their pursuit of enlightenment.
According to the Mahayana, sentient beings are all in this together, instead of pursuing enlightenment for oneself and by oneself. Instead, we recognize the mutual suffering of all beings, and therefore see liberation as a mutual pursuit.
Nirvana is only guaranteed from the viewpoint of eternity, that all beings will ultimately attain liberation, no matter how many lifetimes (or kalpas) it takes.
I think this ought to be an obvious one. The Buddha attained enlightenment. But we are still here on DD! No the DO doesn’t apply to everyone at the same time. It is individual (but not to do with a Self) in its application.
Maybe I will. But don’t forget the point of this forum is to explore the Buddhism we find in EBTs. And unfortunately what you consider Buddhism was clearly defined in EBTs either as not Buddhism or is inconsistent with the Buddhism we find there.
we’re on fire 
