I think we have pretty much reached the point where we can move the entire thread to Watercooler. Thanks for a fun afternoon Rajitha!
2 Likes
There is one point (deep purple region) where the planet has the least gravity.
What about the intermediate region, is my questioning. If the purple area has the aforementioned qualities either on account of its gravity or the cause of gravitation variance there, what of the green areas what run in stripes along the seas? Do these have 50% effectiveness or 75% effectiveness? What is the base effectiveness at which point there is no gravity or gravitational-variance-cause that can assist in the arisings of Tathāgatas?
Those are all very good questions I do not have answers presently.
The GRACE project site is here.
This is how superstitions are formed. Find a little unusual feature (blobs of light on digital camera photos, a good example) then proceed to give it meaning based on a topic you are most attached to. Throw in a good amount of awe and the supernatural, so it cant be easily explained away (nor proven) and some people will believe it as it feels amazing- ie they come to a factual conclusion based on an emotional response (‘I feel something -therefore it is true’ …not).
with metta
ps- blobs of light on photographs are devas 
Listen to this for more. “Mt. Meru” on photo there too.
Sri pada is Mt .Meru? Where’s the snow??
Bodhgaya is around 35 degrees on average in May, the month the Buddha was supposed to have attained enlightenment. Looks like there were less people around the Buddha’s time and more trees. Sounds like a perfect temperature for enlightenment. Why dont you focus on more mainstream dhamma and less on quirky monks? There was nothing in that video which made me think that monk was correct. He said all the archeological evidence that he was born there was forged…c’mon. This is a good conspiracy theory!
with metta
ps- these are only distractions from the real dhamma - your personal practice.
In AN 7.66 there are peaks described as 500 yojanas high (presumably, Mt. Meru is even higher). Even if we assume a yojana is equal to 8 km, these peaks would be 4,000 km high. Somehow, I think that Adam’s Peak with its 2,243 m height doesn’t quite live up to that standard.
This is an environment report from the blessed Buddha himself. This is on the day of his enlightenment.
"There I saw some delightful countryside, with an inspiring forest grove, a clear-flowing river with fine, delightful banks, and villages for alms-going on all sides. The thought occurred to me: ‘How delightful is this countryside, with its inspiring forest grove, clear-flowing river with fine, delightful banks, and villages for alms-going on all sides. This is just right for the exertion of a clansman intent on exertion.’ So I sat down right there, thinking, ‘This is just right for exertion.’
Ariyapariyesana Sutta: The Noble Search
As I said before, people do not visit Buddhagya during May/April because of extreme heat. The above does not tally at all with the reality.
Well, this comment of yours appears barely 1 minute after I posted the 2-hour long video. Surely you did not watch the entire video?
I really do not think you know the kind of monk you are insulting.
4000 km would be longer than the radius of the moon. You clearly have got your maths wrong.
The island would have been much bigger and the mountain would have reached higher altitude 2500 years ago anyway.
Prove to me that yojana is not equal to 8 km and that the text of the sutta does not say what it says.
Sinerussa, bhikkhave, pabbatarājassa jhāyamānassa dayhamānassa vinassamānassa mahatā tejokhandhena abhibhūtassa yojanasatikānipi kūṭāni palujjanti dviyojanasatikānipi, tiyojanasatikānipi, catuyojanasatikānipi, pañcayojanasatikānipi kūṭāni palujjanti.
My math is okay. There are peaks that are 500 yojanas high (so says the Sutta, and according to your logic anything a Sutta says is necessarily literal truth), 1 yojana = 8 km (mostly likely more), you do the math.
1 Like
Its not Kilo Metre but about 7 miles.
So the mountain would have been approx 36,960 ft 2500 years ago. Taking to account an attrition rate of about 10 feet/year you have the present day height.
Okay, 1 yojana = 7 miles = approx. 11,2 km
The Sutta clearly says there are peaks 500 yojanas high (see the text).
If that would be the case, at the Buddha’s day there must have been peaks that are 500 * 11,2 = 5,600 km high. Not my words, this is literally what the Sutta says. Where are these peaks nowadays?
An attrition rate of 91 cm per year is a very interesting figure. Do you have any sources confirming it?
No, I do not have sources.
It’s common sense landscape can change over 2500 years.
To echo Ajātasattu: just as if a man when asked about a mango would speak about a breadfruit, or as if a man when asked about a breadfruit would speak about a mango, in the same way, when asked about a sutta describing pleasant weather, you have spoken about a sutta describing bucolic beauty.
Still, I appreciate the valiant effort.
5 Likes
Come on… There must be a community guideline to help us dealing with this sort of thing 
If someone come into my local Buddhist centre and start a similar sort of non sense conversation someone from the centre’s administration will eventually invite him/her to leave…
To assume that mountains have an attrition rate of 91 cm per year is not common sense, especially on Sri Lanka. And you have not addressed 5,600 km high peaks.
Sri Lanka has the lowest weathering rates of all mountain sites studied to date
Source: Tectonic Faults: Agents of Change on a Dynamic Earth - Google Books
Anyway, I am clearly doing the wrong thing now, so I’d better follow my own advice. I think this will be my last comment in the entire discussion.
@Gabriel_L [quote=“Gabriel_L, post:58, topic:5303”]
If someone come into my local Buddhist centre and start a similar sort of non sense someone from the centre’s administration will eventually invite him/her to leave…
[/quote]
Someone has to address it. Who will do it for us? No-one. I have already seen a Russian bhikkhu who unironically quotes the PureDhamma website. It is important that people having very unorthodox beliefs are able to discuss them publicly because this will give other people a chance to disprove these views. It is actually this unwillingness to react to crackpot theories that I don’t like about many mainstream religious organizations. Sure, we shouldn’t have really-really serious discussions about theories like this one, but it is important to give people an opportunity to see how absurd they really are. Giving no floor to these people will only drive them underground and accelerate the alienation between them and teh larger community. The fact that this conversation became a bit too long is partly my fault because I didn’t follow the advice I gave myself, but I think it is still important we have short discussions about things like Jambudvipa.
Yet, I can think of a new guideline that could make sense: ‘Do not ask rhetorical questions or questions you know the answers to in the Q&A section.’ The OP clearly had an agenda from the very beginning and knew full well what the answer to his question will look like. He even marked one of his comments as answering his own question. So, instead of putting the thread in the Discussion category where he would have presented his argument in the opening post, or writing a neat essay on the matter, he tried to present this thread as a legitimate inquiry, so that his own answer to his own question he knew all along could come off as a result of a legitimate collective brainstorming session. I think that in the context of this forum this is an unfair rhethorical trick that should not be allowed in the future.
1 Like
I have just made the change. He is free to revert it and moderators are free to do whatever with that (including taking away my privileges). I just would invite everyone to imagine if someone were to walk to your local Buddhist centre/vihara and do a similar thing. Hope this crazy event will serve to help us coming up with a guideline / policy on how to address behaviours like this one.
When people discuss topics that one is not interested in personally, one always has the option of not entering the discussion.
2 Likes