0

As I've understood this forum is govern by the community. The moderators get elected in forums like SO. But here it seems some are selected as moderators, which has no issue as they are maintaining the ethics and other practices in this forum. But the main problem I saw is, even Budhha come and answer a question here, some of the moderators and highest scored profiles will reject him. Why? Because all the people here who think they know everything, are not open minded. So let me tell this, Buddha didn't write a book on buddhism. He preached this verbally not using english. So the words which today dhamma is explained has deeper meaning which doesn't understand by translating to another language. As an example 'anicca'. I saw someone has said this is an opposite of 'nicca' but not the opposite of 'icca'. We still use the word icca in our day today life.

Anyway, what all specially the moderators should keep in mind is this Buddhism is not a game as mentioned by Buddha if someone tries to interpret something falsely and saying this is said by Buddha, it's 'anantariya papa karma' which means a worst sin a one can do which will cause them to suffer in hell. (Killing parents is also one of 5 among those sins). So I'm writing this with millions of Metta to the moderators and high score users do not close the path to Nivana with tge life you got as a human. The main reason, I'm posting this is to make everyone understand how serious this is. It doesn't matter whether a child doesn't know a poison drink kills him or not; if a child drinks a poison he will die. Whether you know this or not you may do these sins. Buddhism is not programming, buddhism is not maths just to understand the theories and answer. Buddhism is not simple as just to meditate and keep the mind calm and answer. Because Nivana is far beyond this. If you've heard Alarakalama, Uddakarama putta (Siddhartha's teachers) were also capable of reaching dhyana but they didnt know the Nivana. So just because someone has dhyana it doesn't mean he is in right path. Only the first entrant is in right path whether he has dhyana or not it doesnt matter.

So the question is, are you sure is this the correct way of governing buddhism related knowledge? I was asked once not to put some site reference as it conflicts with some high score profile here who even doesn't know whats the meaning of 'uggatithagna'. All these are said with Metta, not to harm anyone or not to make myself a high profile here. Because each and everyone of us are alone in our journey of sansara, don't block your path to Nivana when its the time of real dhamma has risen.

  • Good possible well meant, but one thing not to forget: age and social stand, respect. A moderator should be seen as your Brahma here, having taken birth in his realm. And a younger householder should not approach an older, who could be even his father, in ways that would harm his position. While a younger and student has actually also duties, he needs to point out things in ways which are proper. For example: "But is it good and not possible a fault if doing this or that?" As for critic its good to ask for leave first. Maybe Upasaka likes to consider it, and remember t. older traditions of him – Samana Johann Jul 10 at 2:30
  • Moderator should be seen as a brahma? Have a look SN-4 Samana Sutta to find out who is the brahma (bamuna) in Buddhism. I'm not talking about respect here or age. If tge community is trated them as 'bamuna' they should not over power it. They can only if they are real 'bamuna' in buddhism. If not they are in a danger. Thats all I wanted to highlight. So if some moderator act wrongly it harms him back as karma. This not happens only to moderators for all of us its the case. – follower Jul 10 at 3:11
  • about the age. I've heard a story about a daughter who is about to die, addressing to her father as younger brother. Then this person asked about this from Buddha and the response was yes she is correct. Because she is once return and you are stream entrant. From that you may understand how the age matters in Buddhism. Not to offense anyone but with millions of metta. – follower Jul 10 at 3:14
  • now already disrespect toward leader, elders, Brahmans and contemplatives... hurry up, to correct your views and ask for pardon, young man. – Samana Johann Jul 10 at 4:57
  • I haven't disrespect anyone here. I've just highlighted the risk. So I don't know what to correct. And what action should I ask pardon for. You may have misunderstood my words above. I should say this; pardon me if someone feel bad because of above. Because english is not my mother tongue. And I didn't mean harm to any one by saying above. Just wanted to highlight the risk. – follower Jul 10 at 5:32
  • It's not a game here or better, even regarding something as just a game, one accumulates bad habits very fast one would say that one does not have in "real life". Let it be known when down on earth and right attitude again, young man with many duties, many dependencies. – Samana Johann Jul 10 at 5:57
  • I guess I am "a senior", then, in the sense that I've been a user of this site since 2014 -- though I'm not one of the very first users -- and I read everything posted on Meta to find out what policies "the community" wanted moderators to implement on this site. It's not complicated: 1) It's a question-and-answer site 2) Comments and other chat which distract readers from the Q&A might be deleted from the main site 3) Moderators generally won't delete answers, if you want to post answers to other people's questions. 4) Please avoid being hostile to other users and/or other schools of Buddhism. – ChrisW Jul 10 at 17:48
  • I'm really worried what you mean by this. This is not about seniority in the site. I know you on SO too. I know who you are! (Of course you are a senior) That's not what I meant. Anyway let's wrap up this here. I'm fed up. But need to add one thing. Have I ever being hostile to anyone? I may have argued in order to direct or find towards the truth. By just remembering a phrase from the book on how to swim doesn't make no one swim (I'm very calmly saying this, please don't get mad at me). And as I said even a child get died if he eats poison with or without knowing it is. Millions of Metta..! – follower Jul 10 at 17:54
  • Samana Johann was likening a moderator to Brahma! There's a sutta in which Brahma is the first-born into the realm, and therefore thinks that he created it ... I don't remember being even one of the "first born" into this realm (but I do think I have a duty to the people who asked me to act as a moderator). And, no, you haven't been hostile. – ChrisW Jul 10 at 18:07
  • @ChrisW: If you can remember I've thanked you many times saying, thanks for the support to keep the community or helping to organize the content Anyway where I got worried was, some highscored profile asked me do not refer to puredhamma site. puredhamma.net/key-hidden-dhamma-concepts/… Which is an act of hostile right? I tried to find that reference but I couldn't. That's where it started to seem like this is bias community. With Metta..! – follower Jul 10 at 18:30
  • @follower I think I remember which user said that. He is (how can I put this politely?) more outspoken than most other users of this site. I guess I allowed that comment to pass, without editing it, as an opinion (like someone might say, "I don't think that's a good translation", or something, without meaning to be too offensive or trolling) but if you do see a post which you find hostile you can flag it or comment on it here on Meta so I can inspect it closely and maybe edit it. And though he posts quite prolifically, they're not necessarily representative of the bias of the whole community. – ChrisW Jul 10 at 18:47
  • 1
    @ChrisW Thanks as always..! – follower Jul 10 at 18:49
  • @ChrisW: And that person is very rude and had been hostile to me. I took a screenshot of it, from the phone. You may find it here. And after few mins he has change it to some text and then had deleted it completely. But these are not acceptable from a buddhist. drive.google.com/open?id=1PFYpFgH6qKT4lMkc3NeoMpRW4i8-ArNH – follower Jul 12 at 7:20
  • Habitual. Most observant know that. Being are heirs of their kamma. Good considered to get not angry – Samana Johann Jul 12 at 14:23
  • 1
    Agree on all, as I said I didn't complain about it as I understood what kind of a person he is. Thanks for your time. – follower Jul 13 at 10:50
3

I can understand that you have a different opinion on what "anicca" means.

But to rant here that we're going to hell for saying "anicca" means "impermanence" is forcing your views upon the community and trying to censor others.

How Buddhism.SE works, is that if you think an answer is wrong or of low quality, you can vote it down. If you think an answer is right or good, you can vote it up. There is freedom of speech in Buddhism.SE in this way.

For e.g. this answer received a lot of downvotes because the community thought that it's not good. But that answer did not get deleted, because it is not really hate speech or spam etc. The moderators did not censor this legitimate answer even if it was not a good one. The moderators should only censor answers that are not an answer (e.g. comment), hate or abusive speech, spam, very low quality (e.g. one-liners) etc.

This answer expressed the view that "anicca" means "insatiable", but it was still allowed, although downvoted, because it is a legitimate answer even if the community did not agree with it.

In fact, I think Buddhism.SE supports freedom of speech more than other Buddhism sites. For e.g. expressing the view that "anicca" does not mean "impermanence" is not allowed on SuttaCentral.

On the SuttaCentral page "Extremist views are banned on this forum", Bhikkhu Sujato, a well-known translator and scholar of the Pali Canon, wrote the following text (see below). This means that if you try to express the view that "anicca" does not mean "impermanence" on SuttaCentral, you may get banned because SuttaCentral considers that a non-hateful extremist view. Also see this comment by Bhikkhu Sujato.

This does not apply here on Buddhism.SE. I think you should be grateful that you can freely express your opinions here and not try to censor the fellow members of Buddhism.SE.

From the SuttaCentral page "Extremist views are banned on this forum":

Advocating extremist views is banned on this forum.

  • Anyone advocating hateful views will be banned without warning.
  • Anyone advocating non-hateful extremist views will be warned, and if they persist, banned.

What is an extremist view?

Generally it refers to views that blithely reject well-established facts. The views themselves may or may not be hateful, but they are always delusional. Such views seem like an innocuous theory, but they often aim at creating a nationalist, sectarian fundamentalism.

It is not possible to define these with precision, so I will decide on a case by case basis, with consultation if necessary.

We are concerned primarily with Buddhist extremist views, but other forms of anti-reality extremism are included, such as climate change denial.

Examples of hateful views include anti-semitic, homophobic, misogynist, racist, and pro-nazi ideas.

Examples of non-hateful extremist views include:

  • The Buddha was born in Sri Lanka.
  • Anicca doesn’t mean impermanence.
  • The original Pali manuscripts at Aluvihara exist.
  • Pali fundamentalism (Chinese texts are all Mahayana, etc.).
2

I've just now understood what this post is about.

In a now-deleted comment under this question you posted the following comment ...

This is a good example to prove the buddhism's core is not impermanence which some mistkenly interpret the meaning of the word 'anicca'. Its correct meaning is 'insatiable'. When something is insatiable it always cause dukkha. This is not tge exact noble dukkha. But its (anicca, which is not the impermanence) the the root cause to noble dukkha. In this forum explaining this would just adds down votes.

... which I deleted.

You then commented ...

see my previous comment is deleted. This community is not open minded. Without knowing they are doing a big sin to them selves. They may see the right path some day. With Metta

... and I replied ....

Here is a description of how to use the site's "comment" feature. If you want to answer the question then please post it as an answer (not a comment) -- or if you don't want to answer the question then don't. A comment on the question is for e.g. when you don't understand the question or want to suggest an improvement to how it's worded.

Your comment was related to this post -- Is "impermanence" a bad translation of "anicca"?


Anyway, if you refer to The Tour it says,

This site is all about getting answers. It's not a discussion forum. There's no chit-chat.

Just questions...
...and answers.

My function here as moderator is not to decide what's Buddhist or orthodox -- it's not because I know a lot about Buddhism that I was asked to act as moderator -- instead I should help to explain ...

  • The policies defined by Stack Exchange (for all SE sites) -- see e.g. the Help pages
  • And defined by the "community" of users (for this site) -- see e.g. FAQ index (summary of site policies)

... (and to implement those policies, sometimes by deleting posts).

Apart from the Help page about comments which I already linked to, see also:

Regular users can't delete other users' comments, but as a moderator I can and may -- I assume that:

  1. Someone -- who may be a regular user of the site, and/or a naive reader -- might find the Is Jhana considered dukkha and/or conditioned? page because they're interested in that specific topic
  2. They don't know you nor what you've posted previously
  3. Your comment as posted is therefore more-or-less incomprehensible -- a distraction

If you want to answer the question then post an answer:

  • Don't try to answer by posting a comment
  • Don't assume that the person reading has already read what you posted previously
  • Also avoid criticising other users -- see Code of Conduct and Be nice
  • And, avoid making "this site" the topic of your post -- talk about the site belongs on Meta

Anyway I deleted the comment because:

  • It wasn't a clear answer
  • It was a reference to a previous topic which most readers might not have read
  • It was commentary about the site, and voting, and so on

You could post an answer if you wanted to -- but, you said you didn't want to, because ...

In this forum explaining this would just adds down votes.

That seemed to be saying "I could answer this but I refuse to explain it" which isn't a comment that might help the OP.

I guess that -- "why is a post down-voted and does it matter?" -- is a different topic altogether.

For what it's worth if I try to post an answer, then I hope that what I post might be true and on-topic. If it helps a reader that's more important than how users vote on it. I don't answer every question, and when I do I usually include a reference (e.g. a quote from a sutta or other writing).

As for your original thesis, people seemed to agree that the various views like ...

  • Inability to Keep What We Like
  • Repeated Arising/Destruction
  • Worthlessness of Worldly Things

... were not untrue, and were a useful and orthodox understanding -- I think they're paraphrases from various suttas. The less popular part of the message, in case you do want to avoid downvotes in future, was saying "Everyone who translates anicca as 'impermanent' is wrong".

  • You may can relate the question here to the comments / questions and answers I'm related to. Which was not I tried to highlight. If I wanted to highlight those, I would directly raise it here. When I saw you the moon by pointing my finger towards the moon, please don't look at the finger try to see the moon. Again I'm saying Buddhism is not a simple thing to play with. Just understand if u drink poison u die no matter whether u did it purposely or not. So dear Sir, I'm not blaming any moderators here. I just wanted to highlight the risk. Finally its your car (life journey) your petrol. – follower Jul 8 at 17:56
  • Let my person ask: would there be a for Nyom Chris given possibility to transform a comment, if needed, to chat instead of deleting, since deleting is in nearly all cases, if not given, not skillful, for what ever "higher sake" – Samana Johann Jul 10 at 2:24
  • 1
    @SamanaJohann Thank you for the suggestion. I usually "move to chat" if the comments are already a conversation between users (so that users can continue the conversation in chat if they want to), but you're right that I could do that more i.e. even with single comments. So I've done that now with the comments under this question. – ChrisW Jul 10 at 8:11

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .